Filmmaking / Directing : Suggestions on locating Locations? by Max Edward Woertendyke

Second thing: does your small SAG budget provide for the (very expensive) covid procedures on set? Third (which I always put first) what is the purpose of going SAG at all? If it's because you want to employ SAG talent, ask yourself which of those SAG actors have a name big enough to provide profits enough to justify giving SAG input into your distribution, etc.

Thanks both for your comments. We have the means for both insurance and required Covid precautions (legally, and more importantly in my opinion, ethically). With our number of shooting days (8), extremely small cast/crew, neither of these is insurmountable. We will need dedicated restrooms and electricity at a basecamp nearby to charge/change, but we will be exclusively be using natural light so won't need to run wires anywhere.

Your question about why SAG is a good one, but the simple answer is that all of us involved are SAG members committed (and obligated) to work with our union. This is clearly not a profit inspired project -- no project made on the micro agreement realistically is -- and so it's really rather an test ground/experiment for a variety of filmmaking techniques and production protocols we're interested in exploring, all within the context of a great story, in a setting that does not require traditional "commercial success".

Will keep people posted on what we end of figuring out if it's of interest. And of course, if anyone has any other specific ideas regarding locating locations, I'd still love to hear them!

Thanks!

Max Edward Woertendyke I understand why going SAG is important for this. Although, if you are FiCor (as most SAGAFTRA is right now, due to covid), you are not required to restrict work to union productions. About your point on ethics - truly, reasonable precautions are required both legally and ethically. However, the contractual union requirements are simply not reasonable, are FAR beyond what is required in even food prep systems, and are not instituted for ethical reasons, but reasons of industry politics. But that's another discussion, which has been done in detail in other posts.

Check a National Park near you for such a location. Courts have recently ruled that a National Park cannot charge commercial filmmakers for permits and fees related to filming done at such a location.

Max Edward Woertendyke Erik A. Jacobson However, you cannot get permission to shoot in a national park without a favorable environmental impact study being completed and approved first. It's a couple months long process, normally, and it is not necessarily free. It is required for any size shoot, no matter how small.

Max ~ You say your project would leave "an extremely small footprint" so I doubt if the EIR would be a big deal. If your actual shooting time is limited to a day or less, you might consider simply making friends with a local park ranger and just going ahead and shooting it. I've shot on some of the world's most beautiful beaches in So. California and Hawaii that way, with no problems. But don't try that on big budget productions!

Erik A. Jacobson Max Edward Woertendyke Well I've done it several times as a producer and as a fixer, and usually for less than a day shoot. Environmental Impact Study is a big deal. It is required for all production, period, even for a single camera, 1 talent shoot, and even if it is a photo shoot with only hand-held equipment. Depending on the time of year it can take a few weeks to a few months. Depending on the attitude of the park ranger, if you try to shoot without one and get caught, you can be ejected or cited for trespass, as there is no permission granted to enter for production purposes. And likely your liability insurance will not cover you during the shoot if you are there illegally.

Shadow ~ Are you familiar with today's ruling by a D.C. federal judge that it's unconstitutional for the National Park Service to require permits or charge fees for commercial filming on its land? Apparently their rules are being loosened considerably, perhaps even the EIR you feel is such a big deal, even for small, low budget filmmakers like Max. Thankfully, the world of independent film has had numerous rebels over the years such as Ed Burns, who persisted in challenging rules for the sake of rules and ultimately triumphed over them.

Erik A. Jacobson The ruling to my knowledge is that they cannot charge fees for permits, not that they cannot require permits. They are still required by law to do the environmental impact study, and it cannot be interpreted as giving carte blanche to film productions to do what they want, which would be absurd.

Just as an update, we've received some good leads on privately owned land -- some individually or family owned, others by land trusts -- who are open to our using their property as a location. Also NYC run parks folks have also been quite helpful and those locations (for anyone here in the metro area) are extremely affordable/useable -- but we haven't yet been able to find anything that quite matches what we're looking for in terms of environment. Alley Park Pond is the closest so far, but it's missing some key elements of what we need. Will continue to keep folks posted as more develops!

Further update: After approaching a number of parks (township owned), and land trusts, and making clear that we were operating as LOCAL filmmakers, we were offered two separate park locations free of cost. Needless to say, we will be sending a big THANK YOU gift to the people who helped arrange it, but just goes to show that the surest way to get a "NO" is to never ask -- especially if you have an otherwise well thought out, organized and planned production (even more important if like us in this case, you're working with an extremely small budget). At any rate, looking forward to moving forward and thanks again everyone for your input on this matter.