On Being A Filmmaker

[fuzzynormal]

It would be so much easier to be a painter or a writer. You don't have to have equipment. You don't have to do all the things. You're not at the mercy of gear. You're not here and you're not there. It's a terrible pain to be a filmmaker, because you not only have the creative problems, but you have financial problems that they don't have. You have technical problems that they don't have. You have machines that are breaking down in a way that paintbrushes don't break down. It's just a terrible thing to be a filmmaker. And if you are a filmmaker, it's because there is something in the sheer medium that seems to be able to make some sort of statement that you particularly want to make, and which no other medium to you seems capable of making in the same way.

Not my words, but I do like them.  As much as I go on about it's only about what you do with the equipment, not what equipment you have, filmmakers are tethered to the technology.  It's the blessing/curse.

If you're curious about from where and whom the above sentiment comes from:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sH8FvTjESvU 

[silvertonesx24]

I find by far the most expensive part of commercial shoots not the gear but the locations and the talent. I find the most challenging aspect of commercial work not to be the gear but working within tight specifications of a creative brief and crafting original ideas. That's why we can make a nice living with creative work, while good luck scratching something out as a painter or non-copy writer.

Don't forget either that the technology allows all new genres to be chartered with blazing speed. In the music scene- Dubstep was made possible by multi-core computers running Digital Audio Workstations that could support hundreds of tracks of software synthesizers at once. It would have been practically impossible to create dubstep music not even a decade ago.