Scriptnotes 134: New Format

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

    Originally posted by odocoileus View Post
    This.

    Also, stage plays, fiction, and journalism seem to work well for readers without using INT./EXT. tags, so these tags may not be necessary for a good reading experience.

    eta

    Jokes too. "Two guys walk into a bar ..."

    We can all find something useful out of having "INT." "EXT" but it's essentially an add-on by a non-writer. As you move into production, some peripheral writing is done that reinterprets the story, from board strips to the editing bay.

    An exec doesn't need to know any of that. INSIDE THE CAR, DRIVING should be it. She is not an AD seeing how to parse out the work for the crew.

    I insist we don't need a new format so much as we need to make it flexible, hide what we don't need. F.i., a good rule would be, characters excepted, everything else that completes itself with a click should remain hidden until switching into production mode.

    Take that idea a little further and it could have infinite value on set: An actor could hide and collapse all his scenes, f.i., the way Google view tells you how many times a name appears on a book.

    A great rule should be to make the read swift and short, with flexible margins and font sizes.

    A simple improvement should be if one word of dialog goes to the next line and that was the last word, it should go back up to the previous line, f.i. Or if a description exceeds five lines, it should shrink slightly but be able to pop up the way you can look up a word in Mac. We could still keep essential plot points in regular font size by making a highlight and double click on all-caps when writing, f.i.

    Some of these things are doable. I'm not so sure about eliminating page count. John and Craig are putting too much hope on logic, in an industry renowned for its lack of one - a movie set is a treasure trove of things that have outlived its usefulness - and even outside of movies, f.i., I'm not sure if my typing is much more efficient in a qwerty keyboard, but is that going to change anytime soon?

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

      I'll wait until *they* want it different.

      Twenty five years ago, when the home computer was being used to write most screenplays, my then agent (WGA list, but the worst agent in all of Los Angeles) told me that this changes everything and screenplays will being to look more like published novels, "more professional", and would use fill justify to make pages look cleaner. He had me do that with my screenplays (and I still have some old hard copies of those screenplays). Okay, twenty five years later... did that ever catch on?

      PS: And headers on every page with screenplay name before page #, making it easier to keep pages of different screenplays from getting mixed up at the copy machine, which was a great idea... that also never happened.

      Just because technology allows something doesn't mean that it's going to happen.

      Bill
      Free Script Tips:
      http://www.scriptsecrets.net

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

        Originally Posted by wcmartell

        PS: And headers on every page with screenplay name before page #, making it easier to keep pages of different screenplays from getting mixed up at the copy machine, which was a great idea... that also never happened.
        Maybe feature honchos figure they don't need it, but it's been common in TV for a while.
        If you really like it you can have the rights
        It could make a million for you overnight

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

          John and Craig are putting too much hope on logic, in an industry renowned for its lack of one - a movie set is a treasure trove of things that have outlived its usefulness - and even outside of movies, f.i., I'm not sure if my typing is much more efficient in a qwerty keyboard, but is that going to change anytime soon?
          I have no hope invested in logic. My hope is invested in what I know to be true about my industry: it is led by people who redefine the rules.

          It insists it will not be.

          But it is. Every time.

          Why has the screenplay format remained unchanged for so long?

          Because writers, unlike directors, don't believe anyone listens to them.

          And in this, we are incorrect.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

            On the notion of adding images to screenplays in a new and improved format: Adding images, as nice as that might be, will open up a legal conundrum that could become a "can open, worms everywhere" situation.

            No one would endorse the idea of having a picture convey a thousand words more than I. The only sticky wicket becomes the screenwriter's rights and permissions to use the photograph(s).
            Last edited by Clint Hill; 05-04-2014, 11:28 AM.
            “Nothing is what rocks dream about” ― Aristotle

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

              Originally posted by TigerFang View Post
              On the notion of adding images to screenplays in a new and improved format: Adding images, as nice as that might be, will open up a legal conundrum that could become a "can open, worms everywhere" situation.

              No one would endorse the idea of having a picture convey a thousand words more than I. The only sticky wicket becomes the screenwriter's rights and permissions to use the photograph(s).
              I never understood this argument. You aren't selling the images, you're trying to sell the screenplay and the images are there only as reference. The screenplay (including the images) is not a document designed for publication, and thus it's not a legal "can of worms" at all.

              It's no different than a "look book" for a film including images from other films. It's no different than an interior designer putting together a board of images to pitch a vision for a redesign. It's no different than George Lucas using stock WW2 fighter plane footage to give a sense of the battles in STAR WARS.

              The screenwriter isn't saying that they own the images, they're just using the images as references to help explain the vision for the film! It's something that is already done when making a film by almost every other department! Directors, costume designers, production designers, cinematographers, and makeup artists all commonly put together "look books" comprised of images they don't own as a way to discuss the look of the film.

              Yet for some reason screenwriters seem to think there's a legal "sticky wicket" here. It's ridiculous.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

                This has already been done too. Frazier's LINE OF SIGHT is full of images pulled from video game stills. Fincher's NOAH has more image-inserts than I've ever seen in a script. JT Petty's INHERIT THE EARTH. O'Bannon's original script for ALIEN.

                It's far from common, but it does happen and it is accepted, if not rewarded. We work in a visual medium. We're not novelists. Hell, even novelists are embracing the rise of graphic novels -- novels with images.

                So why not screenwriters? Why not screenplays with images?

                Not saying it should become prevalent. But it could greatly benefit stories that take place in a setting we may not be familiar with, create characters/creatures we may not have seen before, or attempt action that's never been done before.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

                  Originally posted by keithcalder View Post
                  I never understood this argument. You aren't selling the images, you're trying to sell the screenplay and the images are there only as reference. The screenplay (including the images) is not a document designed for publication, and thus it's not a legal "can of worms" at all.

                  Yet for some reason screenwriters seem to think there's a legal "sticky wicket" here. It's ridiculous.
                  I love the idea of using a picture to convey a thousand words. I'm saying not to register your screenplay with images in them. Yes, there are myriad royalty-free images one might use, although they never seem to quite do the trick as the copyrighted versions, and Corbis, Bettmann, or Getty charge for the royalty-free image, just not its recorded usage.

                  But here, today, in this debate, it's about the metadata of copyrighted images which could come back to haunt the screenwriter if they were part of the sale or option of a properly registered work.

                  Originally posted by keithcalder View Post
                  The screenplay (including the images) is not a document designed for publication, and thus it's not a legal "can of worms" at all.
                  This is incorrect. "A screenplay is not a document designed for publication"? Words on a page that must be registered (to protect yourself) are not 'designed' for publication? Rethink that argument. The salable screenplay will be registered at some point and in all likelihood that constitutes publication.

                  Originally posted by keithcalder View Post
                  I never understood this argument.
                  There's no argument. The photographers who copyright their images feel about their work as you do about your writing. Theirs is a skill that has value and they want to be compensated for their skill. Unless rights and permissions of copyrighted images are secured or freely given -- and sometimes all it takes is a polite asking to use the image -- what you suggest is akin to plagiarism.
                  Last edited by Clint Hill; 05-06-2014, 06:13 AM.
                  “Nothing is what rocks dream about” ― Aristotle

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

                    If you're using copyrighted pictures to help you sell your work, you ought to pay for them or have the consent of the copyright owner. "Reference"? "Illustrate"?

                    I remember a lot of the arguments against sharing script links and can't help but roll my eyes a bit. How many of the people who complained how Scriptshallow (not a typo, just more accurate) had no right to distribute screenplays he didn't own, who complained of how he was using copyrighted work to get traffic to his site and attract people to his overpriced notes service, now feel they have every right in the world to use someone else's photographs freely in order to sell a screenplay?

                    See a contradiction somewhere?

                    That's just not right. I guess what one could do is link to where those images are hosted and publicly available; you point to the site of the photographer who took them or some magazine or whatever. But embedding them in the document? That's a whole different matter.

                    Maybe the screenplay isn't going to be published like a book would, but if you're going to sell it then it isn't just a document of reference like a dossier of images used during preproduction by set designers or whatever.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

                      Originally posted by wcmartell View Post
                      I'll wait until *they* want it different. Just because technology allows something doesn't mean that it's going to happen.

                      Bill
                      What Bill and the good Doctor said.

                      Also, large companies (and probably the studios, too) pay exorbitant fees to have subscriptions to image-licensing firms such as Getty, for example, which allows them unrestricted use of images in the image bank. How often have you seen Getty Images in credits for a movie? Where in a movie did you think the ideal photographs adorning walls and in picture frames came from?

                      This is similar to the ASCAP or BMI fees paid by news broadcasting companies so that their news entities may use portions of songs or entire songs to incorporate in their news productions.

                      It's one thing if you make or take the photographs yourself and incorporate them into your screenplay (beware: image release forms and/or property release forms required!). It's another matter altogether when you "borrow" images because it can so easily be done.

                      I'm certain the studios do not want another avenue paved for them leading to the courts. The whole sticky wicket can be avoided by making your words create those images.
                      Last edited by Clint Hill; 05-09-2014, 05:22 AM.
                      “Nothing is what rocks dream about” ― Aristotle

                      Comment


                      • Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

                        Originally posted by Dr. Vergerus View Post
                        I remember a lot of the arguments against sharing script links and can't help but roll my eyes a bit. How many of the people who complained how Scriptshallow (not a typo, just more accurate) had no right to distribute screenplays he didn't own, who complained of how he was using copyrighted work to get traffic to his site and attract people to his overpriced notes service, now feel they have every right in the world to use someone else's photographs freely in order to sell a screenplay?
                        Quoted for truth.
                        Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue

                        Comment


                        • Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

                          post your **** online **** happens.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

                            I'm rewriting a sci-fi spec and did some research on concept designs for cars, phones, ipads and other objects of the future and kept wishing there was a rollover function, click, or tap that would link my words to an image as a reference.

                            That would indeed be cool.
                            FA4
                            "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy b/c you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowden

                            Comment


                            • Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

                              Originally posted by finalact4 View Post
                              I'm rewriting a sci-fi spec and did some research on concept designs for cars, phones, ipads and other objects of the future and kept wishing there was a rollover function, click, or tap that would link my words to an image as a reference.

                              That would indeed be cool.
                              FA4

                              it'd be more than cool
                              it'd be spectacular.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Scriptnotes 134: New Format

                                Originally posted by Dr. Vergerus View Post
                                I remember a lot of the arguments against sharing script links and can't help but roll my eyes a bit. How many of the people who complained how Scriptshallow (not a typo, just more accurate) had no right to distribute screenplays he didn't own, who complained of how he was using copyrighted work to get traffic to his site and attract people to his overpriced notes service, now feel they have every right in the world to use someone else's photographs freely in order to sell a screenplay?

                                See a contradiction somewhere?
                                No. Putting aside the legal question (as discussed on Scriptnotes, this kind of thing shouldn't be a problem), there is a massive difference between referencing an image in a screenplay and publishing someone else's script on a website.

                                Images on the web have already been made public by the creator. Any browser can point to and display that image because the creator has made it possible to do so.

                                Scriptshadow, however, frequently takes private works that have *not* been made public, and publishes them.

                                Completely different circumstance-- both morally and legally.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X