Finding Independently Produced TV Shows?

Working links? by bertoelcon · 2010-12-17 13:01 · Score: 1

If you fix those links then you have a few right there.

--
Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.

Re:Working links? by Anonymous+Cowar · 2010-12-17 13:08 · Score: 4, Informative

Here ya go!

http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/10/12/17/1943224/Stargate-Universe-Cancelled
http://www.comicsalliance.com/2010/06/18/batman-fan-film-city-of-scars/
http://www.starwreck.com/
http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/
http://www.pioneerone.tv/

SyFy by h4rr4r · 2010-12-17 13:08 · Score: 1

So is that not Scifi network now just wrestling?
They might as well just go ahead and brand it as a network for overly butch homosexuals.

If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by Mage66 · 2010-12-17 13:14 · Score: 5, Informative

You'll like:

Starship Farragut: http://www.starshipfarragut.com/

Starship Farragut Animated: http://www.farragut-animated.com/

Star Trek: Intrepid: http://www.starshipintrepid.net/

Frontier Guard: http://www.frontier-guard.com/

These will give you a good start...

Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by Eudial · 2010-12-17 13:24 · Score: 1

You know, I had mod points earlier today. No idea where they went, but I really wish I had them now.
+1 Awesome.

--
GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by forkazoo · 2010-12-17 15:01 · Score: 1

Your list shows one of the issues with trying to find the independently produced stuff. It's mostly unfunded. A lot of production happens around existing stuff like Star Trek fan works and parodies, Bat Man, Ghost Busters, etc. When you are trying to get volunteers to work on something, the stuff with a recognizable name that people are already fans of is the most likely to actually get made. That means that it's hard to find a lot in the way of original programming in continuous series that is independently made.
You can find some things like independent short films, and independent minisode series which add up to about the length of one normal TV episode. But, they are naturally harder to find, since they are generally one-offs. There are also TV-ish video podcasts which tend to cover things like news and gossip, but are much more rarely in the form of things like narrative dramas.
So, what does it take for something like a completely original independently produced science fiction TV show? Well, mostly money. Something like SG-U costs a lot to make. You hire actors, writers, etc. If you didn't partcularly like SG-U and you are happy it was cancelled, then assume an even higher budget for writers or vfx or whatever you thought was the weak link.
Money for production only comes if there is an expectation of money for distribution. If you won't get paid to put something online, you won't pay to make it. YouTube will do some revenue sharing, but not enough for people to work full time making a show. And, there is no guarantee that YouTube will pay you anything. Hulu shows make money on ads, but Hulu is run by the major networks, so they aren't going to be very active in promoting new production that competes with the existing structures. It's very much an Internet experiment by networks that see broadcast as The Right Way, and want to defend their positions. That leaves Net Flix, which really promotes itself based on movies, and TV shows that have been released on DVD. It would be a (possibly sensible but) very large and expensive strategic shift to really promote original production for NetFlix.
I think NetFlix is best positioned to move into creating distruptive new productions, but it would be risky to spend enough money to give such a move a real chance of changing the way things are done.
Until then, fiction series created by people completely independent of the well known Big Players both in terms of money and borrowing IP will be rare, small, done in spare time, generally intermittent, and frequently terrible. Hell, a buddy of mine and I have been working on post production of something that we shot in March in our spare time, and we don't expect to be finished before the end of the year. It's only like ten minutes, but a few amateurs dedicating spare moments just aren't that efficient. With a real crew working full time professionally on our little project, it would probably have been done in a week. That sort of productivity doesn't come for free, and that's part of the reason why independent stuff is so rare.
You also frequently have the problem of a specialist trying to work as a generalist. An actor decides to create something, and characters are fine, but the lighting and technical aspects are a disaster. A technically minded 3D modeler decides that he can do better, so he creates something where every frame is absolutely beautiful, and the audio is perfectly clear, but you don't care about any of the characters, the writing is awful, and the acting would be improved by overdubbing the dialog with something from espeak.
Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by Ethanol-fueled · 2010-12-17 15:12 · Score: 1

Somebody should make a series about fictional character Bix Nood. Except, not all racist and condescending. He would surely have a lovable, innocent charm and he would unwittingly put himself in all kinds of wacky situations.

And best of all, nobody could troll him. When faced with a tough situation, he would look at the camera with an innocent smile, shrug with his palms out, and say his famous catchphrase.
Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by Legion303 · 2010-12-17 18:21 · Score: 0

The two episodes of Phase II I saw had such shitty acting that I never felt compelled to watch another. Indeed, the acting was so poor that I don't even remember the plot. I was too busy wondering why they couldn't find better student actors.
Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by Mage66 · 2010-12-17 19:04 · Score: 2

You obviously haven't watched it in a LONG time.
Star Trek: Phase II is a labor of love, and it's insulting to call the performers "shitty". YOU put up hundreds of thousands of dollars to make one of these things. You'll have more of an appreciation of the work that goes into it.
And, they just don't have the money to hire many real actors, because they have to be paid a certain amount of money based on the time they spend working due to SAG rules. Not-for-profit productions just can't afford to use SAG actors on a regular basis.
Just for full disclosure, I was crew on two episodes: "Enemy: Starfleet" and "Kitumba".
There are now 6 released episodes, and one vignette. There are another 4 in post production with another episode slated to be filmed next summer. The quality of the show is much improved over the course of the shows, just like ANY show.
The first few episodes of TOS and TNG were nothing like the quality of later shows.
Give the later shows a try. You might like them better.
Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by Legion303 · 2010-12-17 22:41 · Score: 1

Note that I didn't call the performers shitty, I called their performances shitty. Perhaps it's a tiny distinction, but it matters to me. I will check some of the newer material out.
Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by drinkypoo · 2010-12-18 00:02 · Score: 1

Whee, more shows I have to find an alternative source for because they want me to stream but I can only do that at lowest quality with a lot of buffering... at least that last one.
Why do people still not get this whole bittorrent thing?

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by bornagainpenguin · 2010-12-18 03:35 · Score: 1

The two episodes of Phase II I saw had such shitty acting that I never felt compelled to watch another.
Truthfully I was pointing to the near professional production values and special effects. My point was to underline the fact that amazing things are possible now, even on a budget if the project is a labor of love. And if it is a labor of love it is less likely to be unilaterally "canceled" or have its story lines veer off because someone in management wrote a note.

--
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by bornagainpenguin · 2010-12-18 04:09 · Score: 1

Will look into those also Al, thanks for the suggestions.

--
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by asdf7890 · 2010-12-18 06:49 · Score: 1

Not that tiny a distinction. A good performer badly directed (or a good performance badly cut later) can appear quite shitty quite easily. A production is often as poor as its weakest part, but it isn't always easy as a member of the audience to tell where the responsibility lies.
Re:If you like Star Trek: Phase II... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-21 05:49 · Score: 0

I wish to speak about your last paragraph. If you want a group of people willing and dedicated then you have to go no further than the local university theater. If you can write a good play, then the students will usually make an excellent production. Usually, with a tiny budget ( $5000), and with great acting, set building, directing, lighting, but effectively no special effects. I find it sad that so many ignore this obvious path to great TV. Sci-Fi is supposed to be about putting humanity into game-changing dynamics usually caused by new technology. It doesn't actually require special effects.

Look at it from the other side. by blair1q · 2010-12-17 13:15 · Score: 3, Insightful

We're seeing the availability of new Sci-Fi content on TV decline.

But the people who would produce Sci-Fi are letting it decline not because they're mean jocks who hate geeks. They'd love to make money off Sci-Fi fans. But it's clear they're seeing a decline in ROI for it.

Possible metrics that are declining:
Fewer viewers for that kind of show.
Fewer of those viewers being observable by the viewership tracking system on which the ratings, and thereby the revenues, are based.
Lower payback to an advertiser for any given viewer.

And why? Probably because Sci-Fi fans are being distracted by all the online stuff that's available, or by their smartphones and gaming systems. I'd mention time-shifting, but most of those boxes report usage, which means the time-shifter demographic are even more deeply tracked than the Neilsen system, which has only one box per N thousand TV sets. But maybe they're time-shifting and sharing. And then there's the fact that in a declining economy there's just less of a profit and Sci-Fi has always been the marginal edge of TV, not its loamy bottomland.

But answer me this question: does Summer Glau count even when she's not doing a geeky show?

Re:Look at it from the other side. by The+End+Of+Days · 2010-12-17 13:38 · Score: 0, Redundant

You want to know the hard truth? There is no money in producing a genre for a fanbase mainly populated by people who are proud of their ideology of free entertainment and ignoring advertisers. What, you think they can keep donating their productions to you?
But please, go on pirating like there are no consequences, then bury your head in the sand while cold reality splashes in your face.
It's a pretty simple thing. If they can't make money, they won't invest money. Dur.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Chaonici · 2010-12-17 13:44 · Score: 1

I saw your posts in today's net neutrality thread. You must be great fun at parties.
I understand that antipirates can't resist taking any chance they can to bash file sharers, but the parent didn't mention p2p at all. At least try to keep your hate-mongering on topic.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by h4rr4r · 2010-12-17 13:46 · Score: 2

I use netflix. If I want something not, I watch online legally or I buy the dvd. In the case of net series I donate.
Try again, oh painter with the wide brush.
What you meant is this audience will not tolerate as much commercials and as cheap a program as the average $Nation_Idol, other reality crap and WWE watchers. Thus they chase the biggest profit percentages never realizing that they are many that must share one pie.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by blair1q · 2010-12-17 13:46 · Score: 1

I just said that.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by blair1q · 2010-12-17 13:50 · Score: 1

I did mention p2p.
"But maybe they're time-shifting and sharing."
I'm not sure he needed that to get him started, becuase he spalled off like a pion from a hadron-hadron collision, but he's at least got it as an alibi.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by zach_the_lizard · 2010-12-17 14:02 · Score: 1

Some of the best Sci-fi is from the 80s or earlier (though there are plenty of exceptions). If I torrent, say, ST:TNG (a show I saw through reruns and videotaped most of in the 90s), am I hurting current Sci-fi? Hell, I have the whole thing on tape if I want to watch it, so either way they make no money.

--
SSC
Re:Look at it from the other side. by beakerMeep · 2010-12-17 14:04 · Score: 1

Sci-fi fans are likely to not be counted in the all important C3 rating from Neilsen. I can't imagine sci-fi fans even agreeing to be tracked by Neilsen though. DVR ratings also dont matter as much to networks because they cant use those stats to sell ad time, and online ads bring in significantly less revenue than cable/broadcast. Frankly I'm a bit surprised they are so far behind with regards to accurate rating systems, but it's no surprise as to why we have shows that cater to those whom are technologically behind the curve...
Ars has a fantastic article on all of this: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/future-of-tv/2010/12/who-watches-the-watchers-tv-ratings-in-the-age-of-digital-tv.ars

--
meep
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Buelldozer · 2010-12-17 14:08 · Score: 4, Interesting

No money, hmmmm.
So please explain:
All of the Batman movies and series.
All of the Spiderman movies and series.
All of the Star Trek movies and series.
All of the Star Wars movies and series.
All of the Stargate movies and series.
Yes some of those are comic superhero series but you're delusional if you think there isn't a majority crossover between the audiences.
Sorry, but reality says that you have it wrong.
There *IS* money to be made with a fanbase of Geeks, you just have to do it RIGHT. You can't throw your typical half assed TV schlock at it and expect it to work.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 14:12 · Score: 0

No, but you are hurting yourself. ST:TNG was utter crap.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 14:13 · Score: 0

But answer me this question: does Summer Glau count even when she's not doing a geeky show?
Summer Glau counts even when she's reading from a phone book.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by airfoobar · 2010-12-17 14:24 · Score: 1

Not to mention that Scifi is an extremely expensive genre to produce -- it can cost over $1m per episode. With this economy, people are probably investing in lower-risk shows like sitcoms and such.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by MoonBuggy · 2010-12-17 14:32 · Score: 1

I really don't understand why online ads are worth so much less. Or perhaps more accurately, I don't understand why TV ads are worth so much. If I happen to be watching non-timeshifted broadcast TV (a rare event in itself) I'll hit pause for 15 minutes at the start and do something else specifically to avoid the seemingly interminable ad breaks. Exposure to advertising (other than product placement) there is zero.
If I'm watching Hulu I might tab over to another window, but the fact that the ads are only a minute or so long means I'm a lot more likely to watch them - hell, there's even the rare occasion where one of them is somewhat entertaining (although that invariably wears off after the first showing, and becomes progressively more annoying the subsequent 35 times they play it).
In any case, I'm continually amazed that most of the TV industry, Facebook, Google and the press are all supported by ads; I just can't believe that advertising is really worth that much (although very successful people obviously appear to think differently). I'd say about 75% of the ads I see do nothing beyond reinforcing the existence of the brand name in my mind (of value to advertisers, I know, but half the time 'big name' brands are crap anyway), maybe 5% tell me about a product I might actually be interested in (and will subsequently research online if it costs any significant amount), and the remaining 20% are so bad that they make me actively avoid the company that made them.
Obviously slashdotters are not the most representative group, but my totally unscientific and anecdotal experience does seem to indicate that it's not just us geeks that this applies to.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 14:33 · Score: 0

Not if you're a MacGuffin fan.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by MoeDumb · 2010-12-17 14:39 · Score: 1

'Hate' mongering?

--
Mod Me Up. You'll make a grown man cry.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 14:50 · Score: 0

Go away, Kirk fanboy.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 15:06 · Score: 0

And why you ask? Perhaps because the average IQ in the US is 97 and declining. Demand for a Science Fiction channel is pretty low unless it offers back to back explosions and wrestling. This is why they are "SyFy" and not "SciFi" anymore. Its joke. Same channel that canceled Farscape, a classic comparable to the original star trek.
They're trying to reinvent themselves to be more then science fiction. I just wish they would drop the name and allow some other channel to rise up and take their place. They don't like the demographic they targeted from the beginning...its not sufficient. So they need to get out of the business.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by fwarren · 2010-12-17 16:31 · Score: 1

Hey
1) I upgraded my cable package so I would have SyFi so I could watch the 2nd season of SGU. I saw the first season on my NetFlix subscription.
2) I watched IRT so advertisers had every opportunity to "impress" me with their commercials.
Not much more I can do. My major problem here is not having Nielson box in my house. I will watch the next 10 episodes, and would probably like a 3rd season. It certainly has been better than the 2nd season of Heroes.
Maybe SyFy will get the picture when I drop back down to the lower package and the no longer get any money from me. I want Sci-Fi on my SyFy. Wrestling, Ghosts and Horror movies do not cut it for me. Neither does Blade Runner and a Star Trek marathon once a year.

--
vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by timeOday · 2010-12-17 17:52 · Score: 1

But it's not just Sci-Fi - all scripted TV shows (you know, the ones with writers, and sets, and paid actors, and therefore lots of bills to pay) are under great pressure from reality shows and gameshows because they're cheap to produce.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Opportunist · 2010-12-17 20:16 · Score: 1

And that's exactly the problem. Why bother trying to make quality program for people who can see through shady ad deals (thus limiting the amount of advertisers that would buy ad space, knowing that your audience does not fall for their crap) when you could make $country Idol and "reality" TV shows that cost jack (500 bucks for the family that drops every pretense of shame and privacy and about 2k for crew and post production and you got an hour of program, try to beat that price!) where everyone watching is a willing idiot buying any crap your advertisers want to shove down their throat?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by dadioflex · 2010-12-17 21:18 · Score: 0

Science Fiction is declining because every year we learn more and more about what isn't possible, and every year we get closer and closer to the singularity. Even twenty years ago you could imagine a future where space cowboys wrestled with aliens in a space station cantina, but even now we're all tacitly aware that our future is being funnelled in a particular direction and that wide open science fiction dreaming is just that, dreaming. Whatever version of humanity eventually does meet an alien, will be as alien as anything out there in the vastness of space, compared to modern, western mankind.

Speaking as a reasonably intelligent viewer, shows like Eureka, Stargate, Warehouse 13 and a bunch of others, actively insult my intelligence. They're written by old men or young men with unbelievably cynical attitudes, who either wilfully deny what's currently possible or casually treat technology like magic - and no, I don't want to read that ACC quote again because it isn't accurate - technologically deficient peoples will regard technology as magic, technological peoples will regard advanced technology as just that, they won't start pulling magicians out of their asses.

Stargate Universe had Scalzi on board and much as I love his first couple of Old Man's War books he obviously couldn't do much to staple together a bunch of glaring plot holes and plain stupid decisions. I hope he made a boatload of money off it, but he'll be tainted if he hangs around TV studio execs too long. The last decent TV SF writer was MJS and before that you probably have to go back to Ellison, god bless his cantankerous soul.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 21:31 · Score: 0

+1
I cringe whenever I see humans in a star ship "in the year 22xx". I'm going to get uploaded within 50 years.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by pearl298 · 2010-12-17 21:49 · Score: 1

The problem has nothing whatsoever to do with money! It has EVERYTHING to do with inflated egos!
The "suits" who run the studios don't understand or trust any "geeks" who write, produce or consume real SciFi.
They will do whatever it takes to preserve their "know nothing" view of the world!
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Daengbo · 2010-12-17 22:15 · Score: 1

Fringr, Lost, The Event. These are all huge shows that I'm aware of, and I don'y really watch TV much. There was also that show about the multi-planet mission that got canceled last year.

--
Put identity in the browser.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Farmer+Tim · 2010-12-17 22:29 · Score: 5, Interesting

Hi, I'm executive producer on four TV shows and I've pitched several that didn't get picked up, so I believe I can provide your explanation.
For a start, you've cherry-picked the biggest franchises, and completely ignored the hundreds of failures.
Many of the series you mentioned are cartoons, which are easily sold for morning timeslots or dedicated kids cable channels; consider the Tamagotchi series, and you'll understand how easy it is to sell even the most stupid idea in that market (as long as there's an action figure set to advertise). Sure, there's a crossover between the superhero and sci-fi audience, but that doesn't translate into advertising revenue, it's that base kids market that pays for most cartoons, some extra eyeballs in an adult time slot is just gravy. Hey, I like the wry humour in Batman: The Brave and The Bold, but it is aimed at audiences aged 7 and older, once you go PG you lose your main cartoon audience (what can I say, most people grow out of cartoons, but that's their loss).
There hasn't been a TV series of Star Trek for 9 years, Stargate's last spinoff has just been cancelled (and the first TV series came as a result of the movie anyway, so all the props and sets were already paid for), the last English language live action Spiderman series finished in 1978 and Batman in 1967 (both cancelled after two seasons), and there's never been a Star Wars live action TV series, so all of those examples are exceptionally bad if you're trying to argue that TV sci-fi is commercially viable today.
In the case of the movies, Batman, Spiderman and Star Trek all had long existing fan bases to build from, and unlike the Flash Gordon movie and cartoon from the 80's, were done well enough to stand on their own merits and attract new fans (not counting Batman Forever or Batman & Robin, of course). If you're trying something new you're starting from a fan base of zero, so there's no word-of-mouth promotion, no nostalgia factor, any publicity buzz has to start from scratch and the show has to be good enough to overcome that inertia. Besides, the economics of movies and TV are different: in television there are no ticket sales, the only source of revenue is indirect (until the DVD release, but if you do that before the show airs the networks won't touch it).
You can't throw your typical half assed TV schlock at it and expect it to work
And there's the problem in a nutshell. To make a successful sci-fi series you need a premise that isn't rubbish (which means you're not appealing to the network's imaginary core audience of idiots), intelligent writers, actors who can babble convincingly (it may surprise you to learn that most actors aren't scientists, they really have no idea what they're talking about even when the science is accurate) and a budget for props, sets, makeup and special effects sufficient to create a consistent and believable universe for the characters to inhabit.
That's not impossible on no budget, as Starship Exeter demonstrates, however because everyone involved in that is donating their time the production progresses as fast as their free time allows; in other words, not very fast at all, certainly not fast enough to fit a 13 week season's production schedule into a single year, and TV networks can't operate with shows that turn up occasionally.
I'll close with the piece of advice I give to everyone I meet trying to get into film and television who hit these brick walls in reality: if it was really as easy as you think it is, everyone would be doing it.

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by owlnation · 2010-12-18 00:01 · Score: 1

Yes some of those are comic superhero series but you're delusional if you think there isn't a majority crossover between the audiences.
It's not so simple.

Movies and TV have a completely different demographic. Sci-Fi movies are generally targeted at the teenage male market, specifically 14 year olds. Whereas if you do that for TV, you will have no audience that pays you, since Networks only pay for the A18-49 viewers. Plus, movies generate revenue for the producers from cinema tickets sales, TV rights, iTunes Sales and DVD sales. That happens for TV shows too -- but in most cases the Network sees none of that money, since they are not the producers of the shows.

Star Trek TOS crashed and burned on Network TV. It only worked in syndication. Subsequent ST shows were produced directly for syndication. While there were some great ideas in some of the ST shows, it was a franchise that was pretty much lowest common denominator TV, it rarely took risks or was innovative. It had pretty much 10-12 plotlines that it recylced every season. Plus most of these shows aired in times when there was less cable and less timeshifting. All the networks had MUCH higher ratings for all shows.

If you are willing to produce a show with little artistic integrity, one that basically recycles the same good vs bad two dimensional characters that everyone has seen an hundred times, with theatrical actors that overact and deliver melodramatic technobabble with the words "duty" and "honor" on every page of the script, then you probably will produce a successful show.

If, however, you want to try something new... you have to be very lucky. SGU, was the first Sci-fi show to really base itself in truth. Truth in terms of complex characters, realistic dialogue, realistic acting, realistic pacing and momentum, minimal vfx that actually added to the story, and the best cinematography on TV, period. Unfortunately, it was borne out of a franchise that lacked all of these things previously. It was on a channel that generally outputs light, cheap, dumb, badly produced, shallow, two-dimensional shows -- see Eureka for proof, but you could pick pretty much any other show.

SGU might have worked on HBO, or AMC or Showtime, where its audience would have been higher-brow and more adult. It would have appealed to a non-sci-fi audience if marketed correctly. Unfortunately that was never going to happen on Syfy, and unlikely to happen with the burden of the Stargate lineage.

The fact that the show is produced by MGM, and that Syfy gains no revenue from international distribution, nor DVD, nor iTunes sales, didn't help it.

SGU is still probably a viable show. It will sell well on DVD, it will sell internationally, it will sell on iTunes -- however, with the business model that is currently setup by networks, there's too high a marketing curve without a network pumping out the show. And it is too expensive a show for a network to take the risk of losing ad revenue by scheduling it.

MGM could take risks and try to break the network business model. It probably would work, there's enough of a global audience out there for the show -- however, even money they won't try to do that.

The business model for networks is broken. Neilsen does not work. There's too much of a gap between production companies and networks. HBO works, because it does not follow this model. They produce their own shows, their subscriptions pay their admin costs, and their international sales and DVD revenue give them profit. This model works. This model would work for intelligent sci-fi too.

There is absolutely no technical reason whatsoever, why someone cannot set up an HBO style network for Sci-fi. And even have that network available all over the World by subscription through the internet (it works for MLB.TV). That way you can say fuck you to Neilsen and cancellation due to low A18-49 ratings, forever.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Internetuser1248 · 2010-12-18 00:11 · Score: 1

He is right in a way. To me the solution is not to stop pirating however. The solution is to use the pirate and geek networks that are forming to produce our own sci fi. I even have an idea of how to do it on a shoestring budget: My idea was to film a sci fi tv series purely from frame captures of sci fi games. Then all you would need are voice actors. You then release the film under pseudonyms so you cant get done for copyright infringement by the game companies (they would be smarter to be proud you used their engines and use it as free advertising but I wouldn't count on that). The quality would be low and it would clearly be an amateur production, but with a decent storyline and and a deep immersive world one could still produce a great show. I have been in the planning stages of such a project for some time and would welcome any offers of collboration, just pm me. The other genre that game engines could be used to film is world war two. I would love to recreate some of the great untold stories of soldiers especially in the non US armed forces as there is a vast untapped well of jaw dropping stories there that no one has heard.

The bottom line is that while a distributed shared system of entertainment is working really well for geeks at the moment, eventually we are going to have to integrate the production side of things into this model. Then we will get the tv shows that the genre deserves.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 06:44 · Score: 0

Hmmm....wasn't BSG a pretty good draw?
And wasn't V somehow renewed?
You want scifi, you don't watch SyFy. Since BSG tanked, and Caprica was a bit too drawn out for my tastes, I watch more anime on SyFy than I do scifi these days. There is a real delicate mix between the story, the feasibility, the actors, and the directing for some reason that's held to a higher standard, that in these days of pump and go TV, simply isn't going to draw people in. People seem to forget that one of the main draws of BSG was the pilot and the first episode, esp. considering all the badmouthing the remake was getting from alleged true scifi fans of the original series.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 07:03 · Score: 0

I'll close with the piece of advice I give to everyone I meet trying to get into film and television who hit these brick walls in reality: if it was really as easy as you think it is, everyone would be doing it.
So were stuck with A-Team and Daisy Duke remakes?
Yes, I understand that its hard (thats why you make the big bucks right?), but its pretty universally known that TV, radio, movies, and music have sucked for the past decade. Maybe Google can make some social networking TV program showing live (sensored) google searches. That would be a w00t!
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Orphaze · 2010-12-18 10:56 · Score: 1

You're not this Tim, are you?
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0591101/
Re:Look at it from the other side. by SpaceToast · 2010-12-18 11:09 · Score: 1

Thanks for shedding some light on that, Tim. Would I be wrong in thinking that the largest barrier is the upfront cost -- and thus risk, if the series isn't picked up -- to the producers? How would the cost of a speculative hour long series pilot compare to, say, a spy show? (Assuming of course that more than half of the speculative show can be filmed on the same sets Firefly/Trek style, and that the spy show will still have to invest in at least one Bookend HQ set itself.)
Re:Look at it from the other side. by bornagainpenguin · 2010-12-18 15:55 · Score: 1

Hmmm....wasn't BSG a pretty good draw?
Wouldn't know since I stopped bothering with that series pretty quickly once it became apparent the writers weren't even trying to plot the series as a whole or make sense of the continuity they'd established, even within itself. Later revelations on just how much of the storyline was more or less made up on the spot without any planning at all more or less confirmed for me the rightness of that decision.

And wasn't V somehow renewed?
Yeah...about V, It seems to be suffering from many of the same issues I had with BSG. Worse yet its writers seem intent on insulting our intelligence and having a storyline that doesn't seem to go anywhere at all. I mean really? In a foothold situation where the various governments of the world are hunting down terrorists who might do their benevolent alien overlords harm, an FBI agent repeatedly casually talks about criminal terrorist activities on her cellphone ? Really?? And neither the aliens who have been carefully working their way into positions of power or the government know how to tap those signals? the worse part is all it would take to fix the situation is a throw away comment here and there about switching the encryption on...
I still plan to give the new season a shot and see how well things go this season, but my worst fear besides a plot that goes no where is the idea that the show will get canceled and leave us all hanging on what happens next. Just like SGU probably will considering the actors didn't even know the show was canceled. I'm tired of investing in the show only to get screwed out of any resolution.

I watch more anime on SyFy than I do scifi these days
Unfortunately I seem to be the only one in my family who can stomach anime, I even tried Cowboy Bebop, sure that it would be good enough to convert a few people. No dice, all they said was why not make a live action version--because the story was great but not the kind of thing that a cartoon should be about...
/facepalm
Still, since the whole point is to have something to watch as a family, anime doesn't work.

--
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Farmer+Tim · 2010-12-18 23:15 · Score: 1

Ha! Sadly, no, I can't lay claim to a career that illustrious. I do have an IMDB listing, but I'd rather not link to it because (a) I like to preserve a little anonymity around here, and (b) it's rather embarrassing by comparison ;)

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 23:46 · Score: 0

TV networks can't operate with shows that turn up occasionally.
I agree and like most of your comment, but isn't this exactly how Adult Swim shows tend to operate? Many shows there can have multi-year breaks before coming back (or even between their initial pilot and the show itself). It's certainly possible with some networks, even if not all.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Mana+Mana · 2010-12-18 23:54 · Score: 1

> TV networks can't operate with shows that turn up occasionally.
Dood, Inspector Lynley*, and Wallander did and do!
But then that's non American TV; but then again as an American I'm fed up with the shiz on my telly anywayz. So exception to your generalization. Pax.
* I recently banged out all the Lynley episodes via netflix---I had watched something like two episodes all year in ~2005 even though I had looked for it regularly, and I caught those two perchance at ~3 a.m.---and I was shocked to discover that the BBC/WGBH production of that very good detective TV series was approximately 2-4 episodes per year till it ended. To my surprise I had seen most of the series and not realized it over the years; the number of episodes is short. BBC series vis-a-vis USA series are for a short number of yearly episodes and not more than a year or two if that many.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Farmer+Tim · 2010-12-19 04:34 · Score: 2

You're quite right, the startup costs are the biggest barrier to sci-fi (I think "speculative fiction" is a tautology since all fiction is speculative by nature, and if "sci-fi" was good enough for Asimov it's good enough for me, but it's really not important...a rose by any other name would still be a hydrocarbon emitting reproductive organ of the Rosa genus). The two genres you've chosen are a good comparison, since they both usually involve high tech gizmos, interweaving story lines and special effects.
Real spies are basically civil servants who work in fairly nondescript offices for the most part, so you don't need a war room style C&C centre unless you want a big screen for a cartoony supervillain to deliver an ultimatum (but when you do that every episode it just gets silly. Note that when they have a C&C centre in a Bond film it's borrowed from the military, not an MI6 asset, and for a one-off like that it's not too difficult to arrange a traffic control room or similar). A slightly tricked-out office space filled with computers loaned on a product placement deal and dimly lit around the edges to hide a lack of detail will do for the bookend set, maybe a nice conference room for briefings, and you can use real locations for bridging shots and exteriors. Costumes are standard modern day clothing (either second hand or more product placement), and makeup rarely goes beyond fake blood and moulage. In all, a good looking pilot can be done for about $150k, provided you leave the effects heavy shots and helicopter stunts until later in the season, but what we're really talking about here is a sophisticated cop show with some wire work and extra explosions (the BBC's "Spooks" is a good example, though "24" follows the same principle IIRC).
You lose all of those advantages with sci-fi, since technically it's period drama and you usually can't let the real world creep in; nobody will believe your ship's computer is a Dell running Windows 7, and a Seiko watch in the year 2400 is anachronistic even if it does pack an electromagnet, laser and circular saw. The sets have to be built from scratch if you want to avoid trainspotters*, which costs as much as any stud-frame construction with unique interior decoration, so you're looking at anywhere up to $70k for a single large set once you've paid the carpenters, electricians and fabricators. Space exteriors and other CGI assets have to be final quality to impress the commissioning editors (no matter what they say, they can't imagine the final product), so there's the modelling and rendering costs, the makeup has to be good enough to stand up in HD, and costumes are usually short run custom creations or one-offs. It's easy to go over $250k on a three-set piece before a single live action frame is shot.
Obviously the biggest difference is the sets, and savings can be made depending on the story. "Caprica" cleverly used a retro-near-future style which let them raid any period in the 20th century for props, costumes and architecture, "Sky Captain" was notable for it's entirely CGI world, and from memory much of "The Man From Atlantis" was shot in the back of a shaggin' wagon.
The figures I'm bandying about here are considered bargain basement, "Jason Of Star Command" level; seamless shows like "Space:1999" and "ST:TNG" cost around $1.5M per episode (adjusted for inflation) with the startup costs amortised across the first season, so the pilots would be closer to $6-7M in today's money (both of those shows were presold, however, so I'm not sure anyone knows the figure precisely).
Not really a conclusive answer, sorry, but there are so many variables it's hard to estimate accurately, and that's kind of the problem: other genres present a more certain profit margin for the networks on the same viewer figures, and like any business they're in it for the profit. Hey, ho.
*I'm one myself; when watching old Dr Who episodes I can't help but laugh at the

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Farmer+Tim · 2010-12-19 05:18 · Score: 1

You're absolutely right: the BBC has six week seasons and a miniseries can be as short as two or three episodes, but they plan it that way (so really I should have said "unpredictably"). I'm not quite sure why they do that, it's hampered sales of BBC programs in other countries for years since 13 week blocs are standard just about everywhere else, but that probably doesn't matter since they're largely funded by the TV license system.
I have to give the Beeb credit though; they (almost) never let a program get tired and stale, and leave you wanting more, not regretting you tuned in as long as you did.
BTW, if you haven't seen it, I'd recommend the original series of Edge Of Darkness. Don't let the remake put you off, Bob Peck was a way better Craven than Mel Gibson.

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Buelldozer · 2010-12-20 02:20 · Score: 1

You obviously have a far more intimate knowledge than I do so I'm not going to argue with you.
I am going to point out though that the poster I was replying to said "There is no money in producing a genre..."
There obviously is money to be made in the SciFi Genre, if there wasn't studios wouldn't keep trying it. :-D
Re:Look at it from the other side. by blair1q · 2010-12-20 04:18 · Score: 1

Let the poster correct your misapprehension, then:
There was money in producing a genre. There may not be any more.
As Mr. Tim pointed out, your examples are the past. TFA, and my post, were about how things are getting hard out there for a space-pimp.
There's no need to go all otaku over something as poorly made as the original Star Trek was, now that you can join www.startrekonline.com and be both bathed and involved in your obsession.
Even something as lovingly crafted, badass, brilliant, and gorgeous as Firefly had trouble finding its audience every week.
In order for a show like ST:TOS to stick, you would have to bring back the A-list SF writers who were crafting its episodes, and you would have to make it for pocket change, the way Rodenberry did, so that you could just bill the network for the lunch money, so that it's more profitable for them than running another infomercial. You would also have to expect that your show wouldn't be the only thing on 1/3rd of the TV channels every Wednesday night (I checked my DirecTV last night and it's got 1347 channels I can watch or activate), and that TV isn't the most exciting thing feeding stimulation to the audience (you're typing on the thing that is).
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-20 07:01 · Score: 0

>
I have to give the Beeb credit though; they (almost) never let a program get tired and stale, and leave you wanting more, not regretting you tuned in as long as you did.
Aside from the last couple of years of Last of the Summer Wine, that is. I firmly believe Peter Sallis carried that show, no matter who he was partnered with.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Farmer+Tim · 2010-12-21 08:23 · Score: 1

Nowhere did I say I like the status quo, I was merely explaining how it is and why sci-fi doesn't get made.
So were stuck with A-Team and Daisy Duke remakes?
Yes, they give the best ROI because they benefit from nostalgia and appeal to the lowest common denominator. Sci-fi that goes for the lowest common denominator invariably sucks, and since the people who go to see The A-Team generally aren't sci-fi fans it loses out both ways and reinforces the idea that it's a bad investment. How many variations on this theme do I need to write before you get it?
Yes, I understand that its hard (thats why you make the big bucks right?)
Working in television doesn't mean I make particularly big bucks, and that's the kind of cheap shot ignoramuses mistake for cleverness. As much as I'd like to I can't afford to fund sci-fi programs myself, mortgaging my house would pay for about two thirds of an episode of Firefly.
but its pretty universally known that TV, radio, movies, and music have sucked for the past decade
You sound like the Moral Majority (which is only subjectively moral and definitely not a majority). That's just an opinion, and it's not an opinion shared by a reasonably large percentage of the population, obviously, otherwise things would be different (and I'd be happily producing Stainless Steel Rat movies true to Harry Harrison's writing). If there was really no market for the crap on TV and radio it wouldn't be there, your failure to understand this basic fact and assumption that everyone shares your tastes (or media executives have mysterious mind control powers that can make all but an elite few consume what they really don't want to) illustrates that you're not just divorced from reality, it's about to sue you for half your income and custody of your children. 50% of the population is below average intelligence; this would appear to include you.
Just responding in kind; if you prefer a reasonable, intelligent response then be reasonable and intelligent when you post.

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Farmer+Tim · 2010-12-21 09:03 · Score: 1

Apologies for my imprecision. What I meant was if you can't reliably predict the delivery of programs to the station, they can't devise a program schedule and so can't effectively sell the advertising space. That end of the business is usually worked out months before programs go to air, even if the programs themselves haven't been made yet; the critical thing is that the producers can deliver on time and on budget, and the point I was making was sci-fi is challenging (masterful understatement) on both those criteria. Good, quick, cheap, choose any two as they say.
Adult Swim as a subdivision of Cartoon Network reverses the rules of most channels using the cartoon economics I described (that is, evening isn't their most profitable time slot). As long as an evening cartoon rates higher than reruns of The Flintstones they're doing OK. What's more if, say, season 5 of The Venture Bros isn't delivered on time (Doc Hammer gets assassinated by gay Klansmen ninjas riding giant spiders or something), they have cult shows like The Dark Knight to fall back on without losing the advertisers, so they can afford to take more risks than most channels. So you're correct, Adult Swim does operate differently, but for reasons other channels can't emulate.

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Farmer+Tim · 2010-12-21 09:08 · Score: 1

Well, I did say "(almost)"; IMO the original run of Dr Who lasted roughly a Sylvester McCoy too long :)

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Re:Look at it from the other side. by Farmer+Tim · 2010-12-21 10:28 · Score: 1

You're technically correct, the best kind of correct.
A sci-fi show that achieves cult status can indeed be hugely profitable, and that alone makes it worth trying occasionally. But Catch 22 usually rears it's head: supposedly sci-fi isn't profitable, so they don't invest enough to make it good, which means nobody watches, so it isn't profitable, so we get the homoerotic melodrama
of wrestling instead (seriously, sweaty, oiled up men in tight pants grabbing each other while reading a bad script? Sorry, but without the pants that'd be gay porn. Of course, Star Trek without pants would be...hmm, 7 of 9 wore a one-piece outfit...pretty awesome, actually ^_^)

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.

Miro by Khopesh · 2010-12-17 13:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

Miro, previously called Democracy Player (as previously noted on slashdot), is an aggregation of independent TV programs. I believe it is exactly what you are looking for.

See also the Wikipedia articles on Web series and the (now defunct) Open Media Network ... and YouTube.

Other recommendations would include Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog and The Guild as well as others listed on Wikipedia's Internet television series.

--
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.

Re:Miro by h4rr4r · 2010-12-17 13:21 · Score: 1

You forgot Chad Vader.
http://www.blamesociety.net/chadvader/index.php
Re:Miro by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 13:49 · Score: 0

Smooth moves, h4rr4r. Now I have /another/ thing to watch. :-p
Re:Miro by bornagainpenguin · 2010-12-18 04:01 · Score: 1

The problem with Miro is that much of what they produce is "Reality TV" and that simply doesn't seem to go very far. I used to be a fan of a cooking show produced and distributed via Miro back when it was still known as Democracy Player, the guy produced five episodes of near network quality cooking and HOWTO and then disappeared. Everything else seems to be a variety show, a news show, or talking heads like diggnation. Worse lately Miro seems to have more and more offerings from the corporates, which require streaming only like the Simpsons, Family Guy, etc. I'm looking for something I can download and watch offline, so I don't have to deal with bandwidth issues--real or manufactured.
Thanks for posting the suggestion though. I'll give it another look, it's been awhile since I checked in with Miro.

--
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
Re:Miro by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 05:19 · Score: 0

No, he's looking for a media aggregator with broadcatching capabilities. Miro is fine, but it's no more the "answer" to that than "firefox" is the answer to "I'm looking for a worldwide network of hypertext pages".
Re:Miro by Khopesh · 2010-12-18 08:03 · Score: 1

Right, it needs help. I was hoping its mention would bring Miro to the attention of indie producers that were told their programs were listed here (who wouldn't want to learn more about their peers?). In that regard, I suppose this is kind of a meta post, but independent shows can only go so far on word of mouth and forums with questions like this.
The Wikipedia links should be useful too, but again they are limited in ways that I'm hoping IPTV loses soon.

--
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.

Iron Sky by vgerclover · 2010-12-17 13:17 · Score: 3, Insightful

You will have to wait some time, but if you are like me, you'll be first in line for Iron Sky.

Moon nazis. What's not to like?

Re:Iron Sky by vgerclover · 2010-12-17 13:23 · Score: 1

By the way, from the makers of Star Wreck: In The Prickenning.
Re:Iron Sky by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 13:31 · Score: 0

NAZI UFOS!!!

Journey Quest by RingDev · 2010-12-17 13:20 · Score: 2

From the makers of "Dorkness Rising" (Greatest indi movie EVER MADE!) Journey Quest follows a humorous troop of adventures along their quest... err... journey... err... well... you get the picture.

Anyway, great series. I think most of Season 1 is up and their funding for Season 2 is coming along.

http://www.journey-quest.com/

-Rick

--
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs

Re:Journey Quest by Chaonici · 2010-12-17 13:31 · Score: 1

I would download and seed this if I could find a .torrent on their website, but it looks like the only way to watch it that they offer is embedded YouTube videos. The Pirate Bay doesn't have anything either.
Re:Journey Quest by h4rr4r · 2010-12-17 13:33 · Score: 1

In their FAQ they tell you to use a youtube downloader. They even plug one. I think their dvd image is on the normal torrent sites.
It is CC licensed so nothing wrong with downloading it.
Re:Journey Quest by djconrad · 2010-12-17 14:10 · Score: 1

I went to college with these guys. Demon Hunters was good about 10 years ago, for a college production. Have they improved?
Re:Journey Quest by Toze · 2010-12-17 18:58 · Score: 1

Tremendously, in both expertise and budget.

--
No OS on the planet can protect itself from a user with the admin password. - Yvan256
Re:Journey Quest by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 07:58 · Score: 0

ROFL thanks!
"Let the encouragement sink in!"

No central authority for these ... I wonder why? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 13:21 · Score: 0

What you seem to be asking for is a central distributor, or hypersavvy review mill for these productions. I guess I hadn't really heard of any such thing.

Vodo.net, seems to be trying something like that on the distribution side, though obviously enough I'd expect most efforts to self-distribute like Phase II or RedLetterMedia.

I'd look forward to seeing a dedicated review blog for these sorts of things, though.

SyFy just doesn't get it by Khopesh · 2010-12-17 13:24 · Score: 1

Don't forget their plethora of B-class horror films. The Sci-Fi Channel wasn't well managed even before it changed its name to look more like an STD. Talk about a network that doesn't "get it."

They need help. Revolutionary vision -grade help. If Comedy Central and Food Network could do it, there's no reason SyFy can't ... but that's not to say it's easy. With this genre, it's damn near impossible. Especially if you have to fight execs that cite profit margins on things like WWE (this is the short term versus long term issue, specifically with respect to brand-delusion).

--
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.

Re:SyFy just doesn't get it by Khopesh · 2010-12-17 13:28 · Score: 1

brand-delusion
Before somebody "corrects" me, that's an intentional wordplay.

--
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
Re:SyFy just doesn't get it by morari · 2010-12-17 14:34 · Score: 2

It's happened to everything. Sci-Fi and TechTV are only but a couple that have succumbed to the lure of being SpikeTV. Really, television isn't even worth watching nowadays. All the channels are pretty much the same.

--
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Re:SyFy just doesn't get it by rtb61 · 2010-12-17 22:09 · Score: 1

What Sci-Fi channel, I believe you mean the Sy-Fy channel and nothing sums up more the 'dumb' of that channel more the the title itself.
Here's the catch science fiction has one of the most expensive production costs, due to special effects and high set design costs. To attract it core fans, the science fiction aficionados, the stories must be rich and complex and hold to premise behind the series as science fiction types have long memories. Problem this is a very limited audience and the drooling wrestling and reality TV fans just don't get it, don't understand and because it shows up their ignorance don't want to watch it.
So high cost, small audience just doesn't cut it when it comes to the insatiable greed of the mass media set, they ain't interested in the art, they are only interested in living to excess. Basically you are stuck waiting until low cost animation catches up allowing quality science fiction stories to be told at a low cost, minus the celebrity airheads, minus greedy publishers ie direct from the story tellers and animation geeks to their most supportive audience.

--
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Re:SyFy just doesn't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 23:34 · Score: 0

"...reality TV fans just don't get it..."
White trash wants to look at other white trash getting their ass kicked, just like them.
Re:SyFy just doesn't get it by PrimaryConsult · 2010-12-18 02:59 · Score: 2

Ah yes, animation, probably the best hope real scifi has left. Unlike live action, two aliens talking on a space ship costs the same as two guys talking in a kitchen. A battle using advanced weaponry or psychic powers costs only slightly more than a good fistfight or car chase.
But unlike Japan, the US has an aversion for animation being used for anything other than comedy or kids' shows. Even Stargate Infinity was targeted for young audiences and aired in a kids' block.
Re:SyFy just doesn't get it by rtb61 · 2010-12-18 16:32 · Score: 1

True life animation, nor cartoons, using virtual characters and environments, driven by artificial intelligence and robotics science. So software engineers become animation script engineers.

--
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen

You can't be fracking serious! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 13:50 · Score: 0

What lead to the cancelling of SGU was the excessive weak pseudo-drama, and someone tries to plug an even worse psychological drama/thriller wannabe sci-fi with no sci-fi at all?

Heck even Lexx with low budget sets and props managed a better plot than this advertised Pioneer One 'alternative'.

Re:No central authority for these ... I wonder why by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 13:52 · Score: 0

I'd take an Indie Web media section over the idle section anyday.

It's not even that labor intensive. Just change a few letters... idle to indie...

And just like that, everyone wins.

P1: worth supporting their business model by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 13:57 · Score: 0

I wasn't familiar with Pioneer One but I just had a look at their page and wikipedia entry. They produced the first episode on $6000, released under a Creative Commons license. Future episodes are supported by fan donations.

I haven't watched the show yet, but if it's anything decent at all, I plan to contribute to this. This is exactly the kind of thing we need to take our culture back from Big Evil Media. These guys seem to be doing it right. The biggest limitation small-scale indie efforts like this have got is advertising: nobody knows about them. Word of mouth can help that. And of course donating and/or buying some of their merch.

This kind of thing should succeed (unless it just sucks, of course, but reviews of it were generally positive, so I'm cautiously optimistic).

Re:P1: worth supporting their business model by Chaonici · 2010-12-17 14:13 · Score: 1

I'm not in much of a position to easily donate funds to projects like this, but I can (and do) help out by seeding their episodes. Since the release of the first two episodes I've uploaded about 38 GB total for both episodes combined, and I plan to leave the torrent going for a long time.
I'm happy to help in this small way, and the beauty is that anyone who downloads the eps can do the same thing.
Re:P1: worth supporting their business model by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 15:57 · Score: 0

I agree,
If it were not for this post I would not have known about pioneer one.
Since this post, I've downloaded and watched both and seeded the episodes.
I'm not a tremendously big fan of shaky cam, and some of the acting is so-so, but the Robert Zubrin characters and the plot itself kept me extremely interested in what happens next.
Probably going to buy a t-shirt. I like being able to support things I like and get a material reward for doing so. Much like buying a t-shirt at a band's show.

Give up on US shows - too much studio interference by dbIII · 2010-12-17 13:59 · Score: 1

The US model where something can be cancelled at every time and where the director can get over-ruled by studio executives even over something as trivial as the leads hair style (Babylon 5 season 1 - a lot of meeting over a haircut) has drawbacks.
Japanese animated productions avoided that first by being low budget enough to get under the radar and that established a trend where 99% of productions last an entire season. There is occasional weirdness from fixed budgets running out - for instance the end of Neon Genesis Evangeleon where they could only afford stills with voiceovers or Live Action Sailor Moon where the CGI character of the first episode was replaced with a stuffed toy. Reduced production values or not you know the series is going to make it to episode 12 or 24.
I think the desperate scrambling to make sure funding continues in US shows drives towards lots of action but as little content as a rock video to keep studio execs happy. I think a better situation would be similar to the Japanese one where the show has a budget for a season and the director and team are left to go and do it. Shows have been cancelled for highly arbitrary reasons or even to get out of the way to let an execs friend have a show.

Re:Give up on US shows - too much studio interfere by h4rr4r · 2010-12-17 14:02 · Score: 1

The BBC method is probably the best, they make a series on using whatever funds they get and if they get renewed they do it again. So never any random stops.

There are about 10 good shows out there, and... by Eugenia+Loli · 2010-12-17 14:07 · Score: 5, Informative

I'm an indie filmmaker myself (used to be a tech nerd a few years ago, but turned into movie magic 3 years ago). I'm constantly trying to find such good shows too, online. And I have quite a list for you. :-)

- Continuum, scifi: http://www.facebook.com/ContinuumTV (shot with a Canon 7D dSLR)
- Pink http://www.pinktheseries.com/
- http://mindseyeseries.com/
- http://www.minglemediatv.com/CursedWebSeries.html
- http://www.crackle.com/c/Trenches
- http://www.crackle.com/c/Fear_Clinic
- http://www.asylumseries.com/ (shot with a RED One)
- http://www.crackle.com/c/The_Bannen_Way
- http://www.crackle.com/c/Urban_Wolf
- condition:Human http://vimeo.com/user1160921
- http://compulsions.tv/
- and of course, the videos in these two Vimeo Channels: http://vimeo.com/channels/hd and http://vimeo.com/channels/staffpicks if you have a Roku, or a GoogleTV you can view most of these shows above via RSS, or via the Vimeo application for these two platforms. The videos in these two Vimeo channels, are really, really good indie work.

There's one more sci-fi web series coming out soon, but I can't remember its name. They use Canon dSLRs to shoot it.

Feel free to email me btw, if you like to discuss any of that, I'm a lot into indie filmmaking: http://eugenia.queru.com/

Re:There are about 10 good shows out there, and... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 18:54 · Score: 0

There's also Infest Wisely, a no budget sci-fi feature in seven episodes. It's about chewable nanotechnology that lets you take photos with your eyes, cures cancer and eliminates body odour, but of course, there are unexpected side effects. Fire up your torrent client and grab it, it's free to share under Creative Commons By-Nc-Nd.
And of course, there's The Scene too. Free to download and share on Technutopia.
Re:There are about 10 good shows out there, and... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 01:09 · Score: 0

www.crackle.com has nothing available for "my region"... Feels very ironic that people gone indie don't want me to see their production because I live in the wrong country.
Re:There are about 10 good shows out there, and... by bornagainpenguin · 2010-12-18 04:06 · Score: 1

Thanks Eugenia! I'll look into those.

--
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
Re:There are about 10 good shows out there, and... by SlothDead · 2010-12-18 05:18 · Score: 1

So, how to watch Pink outside the USA? Anyone knows?
Re:There are about 10 good shows out there, and... by Eugenia+Loli · 2010-12-18 12:49 · Score: 1

It's also on Youtube (and on Bittorrent legally free, I believe).
Re:There are about 10 good shows out there, and... by Eugenia+Loli · 2010-12-18 12:56 · Score: 1

Yup. I believe they're owned by Sony, which explains their tactics.
Re:There are about 10 good shows out there, and... by Spittfire · 2010-12-18 17:06 · Score: 1

http://mindseyeseries.com/ has 24 episodes in the first season. it's a short (I warn you...VERY short) 5 min episodic series. They have a youtube page too.
Re:There are about 10 good shows out there, and... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 21:50 · Score: 0

http://pink-theseriesinhd.blip.tv/

Son... by denzacar · 2010-12-17 14:36 · Score: 1

...them there be fightin' words round these parts.

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens

Fantastic stuff! Wish i'd dumped cable earlier! by edfardos · 2010-12-17 14:53 · Score: 1

SciFi is circling the corporate toilet bowl by cost cutting. Normally I'd be bummed, but this thread shows an overwhelming amount of good content which is freely available. I think I'm done paying the corporate no-talent-ass-clowns money for a bad signal with worse programming.

To the no-talent-corporate-ass-clowns reading this, you might want to put this year's cost-cutting bonus in the bank, because I'm pretty sure it'll be your last.

--edfardos

Re:Give up on US shows - too much studio interfere by 0123456 · 2010-12-17 14:55 · Score: 1

The BBC method is probably the best, they make a series on using whatever funds they get and if they get renewed they do it again. So never any random stops.

Of course that's easier when your sets are made from old cardboard boxes and your 'monster' is a guy wrapped in bubble-wrap and sprayed green :).

Re:Fantastic stuff! Wish i'd dumped cable earlier! by Eugenia+Loli · 2010-12-17 15:07 · Score: 1

I personally signed out of Comcast CableTV *exactly* a week ago! Between the web series, Netflix, Vimeo via my Roku box, and Hulu Basic via my laptop's HDMI, I don't need any cable box. I bought an indoors TV antenna too, just in case, but I haven't connected it yet.

Re:Fantastic stuff! Wish i'd dumped cable earlier! by nhat11 · 2010-12-17 15:08 · Score: 0

The people determines what keeps going and what doesn't. If there isn't enough people watching it, than the support goes away.

Journey-Quest by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 15:14 · Score: 0

It's a journey, and also a quest: http://www.journey-quest.com

Agent 12! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 15:22 · Score: 0

http://www.detonationfilms.com/movie_download_page.htm

Bar Karma by gerry_br · 2010-12-17 15:25 · Score: 2

I am looking forward to seeing what comes out of this: http://current.com/shows/bar-karma/

Re:Every frame beautiful by TaoPhoenix · 2010-12-17 15:27 · Score: 1

A technically minded ... decides that he can do better, so he creates something where every frame is absolutely beautiful, and the audio is perfectly clear, but you don't care about any of the characters, the writing is awful, and the acting would be improved by overdubbing the dialog with something from espeak.

This seems to be the easy way out the critics took to unite in panning Tron Legacy. Tron 2 was just gutsy by Disney, out of nowhere, and all the critics can do is sandwich it between the slam of Michael Bay's Transformers as "all action and boring" to "all dialogue and boring".

I think instead something happened culturally so that we are no longer satiated by even decent SciFi. Lord of the Rings coupled with Harry Potter is the End of Fantasy.

I think we're on the verge of being culturally exhausted, to the boredom-terror of proportions never before seen.

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine

Is there are hope for comcast to save SGU? by Joe+The+Dragon · 2010-12-17 15:31 · Score: 1

Is there are hope for comcast to save SGU?
or some other network?

Re:Is there are hope for comcast to save SGU? by cboslin · 2010-12-18 00:32 · Score: 1

Is there are hope for comcast to save SGU?
Was talking with a friend about this today. We collectively realized that FX, and AMC specifically seem to cancel great series. Started to wonder if they too were owned by the networks. As for Cable Companies, remember that they all have relationships and percentage ownership of joint projects with telcos, movie companies etc...
I wonder if directors, producers, writers and actors will wise up and start to refuse to work for the studios that constantly cancel their series prematurely based on outdated and obsolete metrics...? While I too agree that Independent development is the answer, I can only hope that they can find a way to make money so that we will have even more content.
I know I would not want my efforts to be shelved and never get made or to have something start only to have the rug pulled out from under me in spite of the growing fan base. My guess is that there are specific studios that cancel and de-fund series more than others. Seems like you would want to avoid those studios.
I have heard rumors that one or two networks might start delaying first run shows for 7 days to a month before releasing it on the Internet. Seems very counter intuitive in all areas to me. Especially with their bread and butter, advertising revenue. If you were an advertiser, would you want to advertise on a show that can only be viewed over a single network, I know I would not. People are simply too busy to expect them to watch a show the same day/night it is aired, therefore delaying its release on the Internet can not help revenue. As more people will stop watching the broadcasts simply because you do not want to watch one or two and have work keep you from watching the next episode. We are just too busy and any system that does not allow for time shifting can only further erode the number of people watching.
Thanks to Hulu and CBS I have noticed that when I watch 1 or 2 commercials that is fine...better if they are funny and entertaining. However when I am forced to watch 3 or more commercials, I tend to find something else to do and miss them. Thus keeping the number of commercials to less than 3 during a break will increase the effectiveness of the advertising in my opinion.
I have also noticed that if the volume is increased during the commercial, I will often tune it out, mute it or turn the sound all the way down to avoid the annoyance, thus that also causes viewer ship of the commercial to drop. You think they would know better, but they obviously do not.
Oh and car manufacturers, stop showing me meaningless bells and whistles that insult my intelligence. If the car does not get 100 mpg or more than I am not going to buy it no matter what you say. Just as I want to be off Cable complete, so do I want to be off direct gas/oil as well. I doubt I will ever be off indirect oil/gas (delivery of food to a market and prices of products are increased when fuel prices increase). But I can set myself up with the location of where I live so that I do NOT have to have a car. Until than, at least I can pay cash for a used vehicle thus do not have to worry about it getting towed away because I lost my job.
I now get 100% of my content via the Internet, I will never go back to Cable TV no matter what. If the current powers that be play games with the on-line distribution of content, all its going to do is further ween me off of watching anything they provide. Good for me, bad for them, but of course they do not care or they think they know what is best....so sad for them.
One last thought, when Hulu skips episodes in a vain attempt to get me to purchase their monthly premium service, well that is not going to work, I will get the skipped episodes elsewhere or simply stop watching that series all together. When I get Fiber To The Home FTTH in the future, I will at that time subscribe to Hulu. The reason I will wait until I have FTTH, is because the Cable company throttles b

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2010-12-17 16:09 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2010-12-17 16:10 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Give up on US shows - too much studio interfere by cpt+kangarooski · 2010-12-17 16:43 · Score: 1

Invisible monsters are often good for this.

--
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.

Re:Give up on US shows - too much studio interfere by dbIII · 2010-12-17 16:56 · Score: 1

Better cheap props or a weird reduced budget "gainax ending" than going from episode to episode with the sword dangling overhead. Special effects are there to add to the story and are of course pointless if they become the difference between the story getting filmed or not.
Nobody turns off Blakes 7 just because the ship is steered with study lamps and Viller's hi-tech box of tricks is a red esky. Bad plot, dialogue and casting via nepotism are the flaws in a few episodes that will annoy people more.
Metropolis (1927) is set for re-release soon now that a few more reels have been found, and among other things it has examples of how even very good special effects can just look silly today. The very good model shots of the city of the future are full of biplanes and cars that look like model-T Fords.

bleh by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-17 17:27 · Score: 0

indie films & shows are horrible.. I hope that's not where sci-fi has been relegated to.

Re:Fantastic stuff! Wish i'd dumped cable earlier! by noc007 · 2010-12-17 18:02 · Score: 1

I have to disagree with this assessment. The metrics used by corporations to track a show's viewership are generally based off of the estimations of the Nielsen ratings. Nielsen tracks a very small fraction of people and then multiplies those numbers based off of the population. IMHO, this is inherently flawed. Let's also not forget studios that just don't know how to properly manage and air a good show.

Take Firefly as an example. Great writing, cast, production, and special effects and is something that can appeal to a broad audience. It aired on Fox who has developed a reputation for killing off shows that they don't completely know how to handle and decide to kill it off only a few episodes in. I don't think Fox properly advertised it and they apparently didn't know it was a serial by airing episodes out of order. After the cancellation, there was a lot of vocal fan interest to get it back, but that just wasn't enough to get Fox to pick it back up or at least sell it to someone else.

Mod parent up by Toze · 2010-12-17 18:57 · Score: 1

JQ is ruddy brilliant.

--
No OS on the planet can protect itself from a user with the admin password. - Yvan256

Funding is the key by AHuxley · 2010-12-17 19:18 · Score: 1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Keiser a film-maker, broadcaster ,former broker, options trader, software creator - did suggest :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_Stock_Exchange to fund upcoming films.
Then "we" could all help fund sci-fi ideas we liked.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"

Re:Every frame beautiful by AndGodSed · 2010-12-17 20:30 · Score: 1

I think we are culturally exhausted on the consumer site, but on the production site there is TONS more waiting in the wings.

The problem we have is that the studios decide what we should see, and that means that they push out mostly same-old crap because that has historically made money.

They are loathe to produce really off the wall stuff because it is not safe.

Taking care of the bottom line is killing creativity universally.

--

Seven Days with Ubuntu Unity

Re:Give up on US shows - too much studio interfere by RDW · 2010-12-17 23:46 · Score: 1

'The very good model shots of the city of the future are full of biplanes and cars that look like model-T Fords.'

That's not silly, that's just the Gernsback Continuum:

http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/1988/1/1988_1_34.shtml

Re:Fantastic stuff! Wish i'd dumped cable earlier! by cboslin · 2010-12-18 00:34 · Score: 1

Does seem like they cancel almost everything, you would think they would re-evaluate their methods. They are obviously not working at all. I know if I were an advertiser I would not pay extra based on that misleading info.

Re:Give up on US shows - too much studio interfere by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 00:35 · Score: 0

Better actual series that is finished than things cancelled HALF-WAY through, right?
The story is really what matters, regardless of the fact that a wall is made of cardboard with some cheap paint and splatterings of tomato sauce for blood or whatever else.

Look at Red Dwarf, the series was practically threw together in a blender. There was almost no hope of it going past even series 1.
9 series, bunch of specials, mini-series (considered to be 10), and a new series supposedly in production now. (haven't checked in a while)
The scenes looked perfectly fine, if a little dreary looking because of the recording.

Fixed budgets are great because it requires the teams to actually, well, you know, make intelligent budgets for this, that and the other thing.
So much stuff that is done in filmography, set design and everything in between, is massively wasted amounts of money.
Need a wall? Why waste money on chalk when you can just get some cardboard, paint it, then put random bits of chalkboard at any required breaking points? (if the chalk was being used purposefully for being broken through while the rest aren't)
Cardboard is sturdy stuff and can hold out for very long periods when painted as long as the air isn't too damp.
Even wood-shaving compacted thin walls are good enough. (lesser "flat-pak" essentially, just barely held together with whatever mushy, sticky material you decide to use, such as wallpaper paste)
Building overly extravagant sets is pointless if your show ends up being cancelled.

Of course, that still doesn't matter anyway since all TV is viewers viewers viewers without a care in the world for the fact that the rating system(s) is(/are) heavily broken anyway.
Apparently all those channels they have don't have enough slots for brand new content flying out of the eyeballs, so they need to cancel stuff to make room for reruns of shows from the 70's... or generic-comedy-number-769 where generic dude is trying to find generic chick for life and generic friends in a generic workplace cause complications.

TRON: Steaming Pile of Dog Crap by WED+Fan · 2010-12-18 01:29 · Score: 1

This seems to be the easy way out the critics took to unite in panning Tron Legacy. Tron 2 was just gutsy by Disney,

I walked out of Tron Legacy last night. About the point where we started to get more exposition instead of show. The 3D was horrible to non-existant. I found myself hoping the kid would get killed. It was friggin painful to watch. I was awed by the original Tron, even when it was light in areas of story. This was a LOST opportunity, much like the sequels to Pirates of the Caribbean and Matrix. Except this one actually induced me to WALK OUT. The last movie I walked out on was Kevin Costners "The War".

--
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.

Online TV Shows by Bad_Feeling · 2010-12-18 01:36 · Score: 1

RantMedia produces a variety of shows, they aren't exactly the sitcoms the author was looking for but they are indepedently produced and they even operate their own streaming tv channel.

http://rantmedia.ca/ranttv/ - Online streaming

http://rantmedia.ca/sktfmtv/ - Sean Kennedy The Fucking Man TV

http://rantmedia.ca/patrolling/ - Patrolling with Sean Kennedy

--
Disclaimer: On the other hand, I am kind of a psycho...

Patient J + My big online tv show list Ive been wo by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 02:04 · Score: 0

"Patient J" is absolutely must-watch. Its another Batman one by the same people, but much better then City of Scars.
Really MUST watch;
http://blip.tv/file/742565/

I have also been working on a list of independent webshows shows here;
http://www.rateoholic.co.uk/Collections/TheGreatBigOnlineTVShowList.php
(you can also add your own reviews)

Its work in progress, but theres a lot there already. I'm a massive fan of internet tv shows :)
Yes, this is self advertising. Yes my site still needs a lot of work, but its exactly whats asked for and I AM working on it all in my free time.

Anime by LainTouko · 2010-12-18 02:13 · Score: 1

Several years ago, I was lamenting the almost complete lack of anything worth watching on television. But since I starting watching anime, I've never really been lacking something new and interesting to try. Since most shows run 12-26 episodes and then stop, you don't get problems with things being cancelled half-way through, and while there's a strong studio system, the studios are small, and make most of their money from fans rather than the general public, (plus sourcing many of their stories from one-man or two-man productions), there are plenty of new ideas and experimentation. Even just in terms of the use of moving pictures to convey mood and emotion within the context of a story, the industry has probably advanced beyond what is possible within the limits of live-action in the past decade and a half.

It doesn't make much sense to me to scrabble for scraps of new telefantasy purely within the output of Western TV, where finding anything is rare, and finding something which isn't just a remake or a re-imagining of a decades-old idea is almost impossible, when there are tens of new telefantasy shows being made every year in Japan, and acquisition is no longer a challenge.

Audio dramas by Swami · 2010-12-18 02:33 · Score: 1

Don't forget that there are some independently produced audio productions that are just as engaging and high quality as your TV shows. Here are some that you may find worthwhile to download:

Wormwood
We're Alive
Leviathan Chronicles

Leverage by dysan27 · 2010-12-18 03:33 · Score: 1

Leverage is a high quality independitly produced show currently about to finish it's 3rd season. It's backed by a produciton company, but that company is owned and financially backed by Dean Devlin who is a producer of the show. Reading lead writer/producer John Roger's blog will show you that at least he considers it independent

Re:Leverage by dysan27 · 2010-12-18 03:34 · Score: 1

*Blog link: http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/
Re:Leverage by bornagainpenguin · 2010-12-18 10:23 · Score: 1

I'm actually a big fan of both Leverage (and The Hustle which I believe is its inspiration). Thanks for mentioning it.

--
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!

Re:Patient J + My big online tv show list Ive been by bornagainpenguin · 2010-12-18 03:54 · Score: 1

Thanks! I'm downloading Patient J now and I will be checking out your review site.

--
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!

Welcome to the World by GerryHattrick · 2010-12-18 04:49 · Score: 1

How old are you? What do you do in the daytime? Have you ever interfaced with that mysterious tribe called 'Grils'? They're crazy, but so probably are you, and the result is all we have that will inherit planet earth. Please climb out of the basement, and try to keep the species alive.

Legend of Neil by droidsURlooking4 · 2010-12-18 04:52 · Score: 1

3 seasons. Very funny. I can't believe nobody mentioned it yet.

Not a show, but an indie feature film: by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 07:22 · Score: 0

http://www.hdehal.com/oceania

try reading by commodore64_love · 2010-12-18 07:32 · Score: 1

This past summer when the TV was lacking worthwhile shows, I acquired "the Year's Best Science Fiction" from amazon.com. There are about 30 editions of this book, each 700-800 pages long, so pleny of material to keep you busy.

If that's not enough subscribe to the magazine "Asimov's Science Fiction" which provides 3-4 fresh stories each month.

--
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall

Re:try reading by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-18 11:15 · Score: 1

Aw, good old Slashdot. Someone asks for help with a Windows problem, the answer is "install Linux".
Re:try reading by bornagainpenguin · 2010-12-18 15:40 · Score: 1

try reading
I do read. Television is something I do with family once or twice a week which can be shared and dissected later in conversation. Books? Not so much... Also so much of what gets published in magazines is hit or miss that I actually prefer to by pass it with original online fiction and fanfics.
Maybe if I could get a good price I might try a magazine or two... Hmmm.. Actually I'll give the magazine idea some more consideration...

--
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!

Trying to Make it Happen by BlazeMiskulin · 2010-12-18 07:53 · Score: 1

I'm actually in the very larval stages of trying to create an open-source "studio" to fill the niche that channels like SyFy are vacating.

The Trilobyte Project goes one step farther than just being a place for independently-produced shows, it actually invites and relies on the input of the fans in order to create and shape the shows.

I have 25 years of experience in live theatre (acting, design, production, and tech), so the foundation is there for making the right kinds of decisions.

The worlds created are open-source, and released under a Creative Commons license, so people are free to use the worlds for their own works. The stories we hope to create are plot-driven with minimal FX. There are currently half a dozen worlds listed in the forums and available for discussion and development, but we're currently focusing on developing a single series that will be easy to film and produce.

As I said, this project is in its very initial stages. We have 2 writers and a handful of contributors. If you're interested in getting involved with an independent studio and contributing from the ground up--in input, not in cash--then please join in the discussions and help us create something that we, as SF fans and geeks, can call 100% our own.

Re:Trying to Make it Happen by bornagainpenguin · 2010-12-18 09:32 · Score: 1

Looks interesting! I've bookmarked the page for further reading. Thanks for posting the link!

--
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!

What article are you posting to? by Khopesh · 2010-12-18 07:57 · Score: 1

No, he's looking for a media aggregator with broadcatching capabilities. Miro is fine, but it's no more the "answer" to that than "firefox" is the answer to "I'm looking for a worldwide network of hypertext pages".

Huh? This article is titled "Finding Independently Produced TV Shows" and clearly states that that is the objective for the submitter (bornagainpenguin) when its summary says (emphasis mine):

I'm wondering what else is available that is independently produced and has a greater emphasis on plot and actually finishing the story? I'm already a fan of efforts like [...] so I know that great things are possible, I just don't know where to find them! Can you help by making some recommendations?"

So how does he appear to be looking for a media aggregator with "broadcasting capabilities?" The question is akin to "I'm looking for web sites to go to" and Miro answers like "try Slashdot."

However, if the question were about broadcasting, see the Miro Publishing page (how do you think it gets its content?). YouTube does this too...

--
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.

So much free good stuff by steveha · 2010-12-18 09:15 · Score: 1

There are an amazingly large number of Star Wars fan films, and you can find them at TheForce.net. There are some really good ones. I recommend Duality and Bounty Trail.

http://www.theforce.net/

A few years back I saw a good Spiderman fan film. I Google searched it and stumbled upon a web site devoted to fan films:

http://www.fanfilms.net/index.php

By the way, this was the Spiderman fan film I was looking for: The Green Goblin's Last Stand. "The total production budget was $400, and it shows. However, it also shows what a small group of motivated individuals are capable of when they are focused on a single goal."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Green_Goblin's_Last_Stand

Finally, you have only to look through YouTube to find *lots* of people who are making cool features. Pretty much anything by FreddieW, lots of stuff by jaymegutierrez (anyone on Slashdot really should watch "Clean the Fan"), Smosh ("Cat Soup").

http://www.youtube.com/user/freddiew

http://www.youtube.com/user/jaymegutierrez

http://www.youtube.com/user/smosh

And you 5secondfilms is awesome. They make 5 movies a week; they aren't all gold, but some of them are absolutely classic.

http://5secondfilms.com/

steveha

--
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely

Indie TV isn't free, that's why you don't see it by aibrahim · 2010-12-18 11:07 · Score: 1

I was director of photography for Star Trek Phase 2 for 3 episodes, and worked there on a total of six episodes, mostly in the camera department, but also in visual effects.

I also directed photography on Cawley Entertainments Buck Rogers pilot.

I worked on Starship Farragut, and Starship Polaris, which is an independent indie pilot.

TV requires an immense budget.

Phase 2, and any other show that claims "no budget" is really depending on donations of time, equipment and money from dozens if not hundreds of participants. Looking at Phase 2, the typical crew member not only gives two weeks of volunteer work, of 12+ hour days. During that time they also pay for their food, lodging and travel. Even after every effort has been made the typical crew member spends over $1000 just to be on set.

Some crew members, like myself, offer equipment. I usually provided $10-20000 of equipment per shoot. On one occasion I was able to bring a RED camera, on that shoot I had $65000 of gear on set.

I have all that to offer because I am a professional film/video maker.

I would NOT offer any of that to most productions. Phase 2 got special treatment because its "Star Trek."

Looking at Polaris, I shot that with a Canon 7D DSLR. The total camera rig was over $6000, and would have rented for $2500 for our shoot to date. Add to that lighting rentals. We spent $5000 for our week of studio shooting for grip and electric. (including a low end dolly.) We've shot about 12 days so far, and we have to shoot another 4 days or so.

I want to point out that these are camera, grip and electric department EQUIPMENT costs only. That's all money heading OUT. Not a single soul involved in the film profits one cent from any of that. It also doesn't account for set construction materials, studio rental, electricity, food, wardrobe, props, permits, insurance or anything else.

This is very low budget film making, but it still costs a huge amount.

Coming back to labor, let me talk about a point a producer brought up here. I worked on a series of visual effects shots for Star Trek Phase 2. I had to rotoscope an actor from a series of shots, and then reconstruct the set (Enterprise bridge) behind him. Naturally the reconstructed set had to match the actual standing set where it was shot. If I was working on a "real" show that shot would have been finished in 2-3 days. A week at the absolute max. In fact the shot took 3 months of me working on it whenever I happened to have a bit of time.

If you need the work done faster, you need to be paying professionals to do it. You also can't honestly expect to pay minimum wage. On average I'd expect to have to pay out $6000 per day for a crew of 30. That only works out to an average salary of $50000 per year, which is low given the skill sets required. It comes to $90000 per episode with a 3 week shooting schedule per episode.

This depends on keeping the unions OUT of the production, which is hard.

For comparison, the union minimum rate for my job, director of photography, on a film is $1200 per day. Using minimum staffing, each camera requires a DP/Operator, a 1st assistant. Each unit requires a second assistant camera and digital imaging technician. That minimum staffing requires 4 people, with a union minimum salary of $2600 per day- and that does not include any equipment.

This doesn't count post production crew, or allow for pre-production on an episode. It also doesn't include all the actors that go in front of the camera.

In order to produce a show the caliber of Phase 2 caliber on a timely basis (i.e. one episode every three weeks) we would need a minimum of $200000 per episode. I expect it to run $350000 per episode.

So... if you want independently produced TV you must come up with that kind of money. $3.6 million per year. Nobody is going to get rich on those sort of numbers.

Realistically, if you want to attract good qualified people and give them all the gear they need, then you should double that figure for a 13 episode series. If you want a 20 episode season, there are more economies to be had so figure 10 million or so.

--

Don't post innacurate information
If you do, I swear by my pretty floral bonnet I will end you.

Re:Indie TV isn't free, that's why you don't see i by Eugenia+Loli · 2010-12-18 12:55 · Score: 1

What you say is of course true, but it doesn't have to be this way. Four months ago, the most expensive Greek TV series ever, The Island, was broadcasted: 150,000 Euros per 50 minute episode (26 episodes were made). What they created for that amount of money, I'm sorry to say, rivals any of the US efforts for Star Trek or Star Wars indie fan films. Greek TV generally sucks, but they got it right on this show. But of course, there are no unions in Greece, and salaries are smaller there. Still, it's something that US needs to think about when the unions put crazy minimum prices for cast and crew.

it's never too late by shnull · 2010-12-18 19:08 · Score: 0

to start gaming, don't get caught in an mmo though, also, if you're into sci-fi / fantasy, there's lots of great aniime outthere, death note, monster, blood+ , hakuoki, not your standard wobbling tit's 'n panties

--
beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)

Re:TRON: "Lost" Opportunity? by TaoPhoenix · 2010-12-18 19:17 · Score: 1

Let me borrow a pun to ask you a question.

What did you think of the show Lost? I'm betting some of the same story problems the show had floated over.

I wish studios would allow fan mashups of movies. Do you think it was okay in the visual department if you could hack out what every one refers to as "20 minutes too long"?

We have an endemic problem with movies with good visuals getting dragged down by broken scripts. Sometimes a nice reviewer will say that an actor did their damndest with what they were handed. In this case the Vailiant Effort award is apparently slated for Olivia Wilde.

However we'd have to solve our current copyright problem before that happened.

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine

Its your fault, Slashdot by janerules · 2010-12-19 09:36 · Score: 1

If all you nerds would sit around and watch TV instead of using HULU and talking on slashdot, advertisers would make more money. Then the shows could be better, and it would actually be profitable to be in sci-fi. Unfortunately I got tired of tv when I was 16 and never looked back.

Asylum - The Series by Anonymous Coward · 2010-12-19 10:46 · Score: 0

Asylum: http://www.asylumseries.com

Shot on a RED, all original score and show on location at an abandoned mental hospital. It's a drama currently showing online at http://asylumseries.blip.tv

Re:Fantastic stuff! Wish i'd dumped cable earlier! by nhat11 · 2010-12-23 12:59 · Score: 0

Just because is good doesn't mean the ratings will be good nor attracts a lot of viewers. The amount of fans vocalizing for the show return doesn't compare to crappy reality TV shows. Yes the Nielsen system is flawed and need updated but it does work to some extent and thus decides what stays on or not depending on the amount of people watching.

Slashdot Mirror

Finding Independently Produced TV Shows?

151 comments