Re: Capturing New York's distinctive thrum

From: Jim Carlile (email suppressed)
Date: Mon Oct 29 2007 - 00:26:36 PDT

Nobody's hostile-- I'm just baffled by the fact that people in NY think that
they're getting a good deal now. With the original proposed rules, a fairly
sizeable group got a free 30 minutes to shoot anything they wanted to.
But now, if you have a truck or cables or any kind of obstruction, you need
to get a permit as well as insurance-- for ANY length of time. How's that
good?-- smaller independents had a better deal with the old proposal.
And solo workers never needed permits, either, so why all the fuss from
them? They were never impacted by the old proposal.
Why aren't any of you asking the city why they took away the 30
minute-freebie time period for more involved shoots?
They relaxed the insurance requirement (kind of) and made the permits free,
but the bigger shoots are getting more red tape than under the original
proposal. That's something to cheer about?
In a message dated 10/28/2007 10:56:10 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
email suppressed writes:

In any public forum, useful utterances are often likely to be met by the
odd idiosyncratic angry response. But to let these solitary critiques lead
to a silencing of public utterance would be tragic. I have no idea why Jim
Carlile feels the need to express his views on NYCs regulations in such a
hostile way -- the notion that the experimental filmmakers have now fucked
things up for the shoestring indie makers is a straw man argument if ever
I've heard one. But I don't see why anyone on FRAMEWORKS should take any
notice of Carlile's bile at all at this point. Apologies Sam, but by
showing the rant affected you, you may have encouraged more of same.

************************************** See what's new at

For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.