How do you pick the films for each collection? What goes into the decision making process?

Basically I just try to find the best shorts from each type, each genre. Because obviously you've got everything from experimental and underground film, through to fairly commercial exercises, calling card films, which are really prevalent in the states. It's a matter of trying to find a balance, from early films from known directors and films from unknown directors. The early films are on there partly so people can see them and partly because I think they're quite inspiring for people to see. Quite often shorts from directors that have gone on to have huge careers are not perfect � I think that's quite important, encouraging � you don't have to get it right first time out of the gate. And they're also very interesting to watch if you're at all interested in those kinds of directors� The series came about because I had made a short that had won lots of awards, Je t'aime John Wayne, and I wanted to release it, but after it finished with the festivals there was nowhere for these films to go. And I knew there were a lot of the other people in same position.

Does the critical and commercial success of Cinema 16 put pressure on you to repeat it with each new release?

No, the only thing I want to do is make sure the quality is right. I think it only works because of the quality of the films on there. The good thing about a DVD like this is that you can put all the good films in one place � and the problem with film festivals � you'll sit through a short film programmes and they'll only be one great short that you'll want to see again, and probably the rest of the films are mediocre, or bad. I think its important that film festivals exists to give everyone a chance to have their work screened, but at the same time the problem is if the audience isn't really avid they won't necessarily come back if they don't see a good programme.

What is the next release in the series?

There's going to be one more which will be films from the rest of the world � world cinema � which is actually where some of the best shorts are made, they don't tend to get made in the States. The short isn't America's strongest genre. The film's that tend to get awards at festivals, the films that get nominated for Oscars, tend to be foreign films. It's going to be broad; it's going to include Park Chan-Wook, and Andrea Arnold's Wasp, which won an Oscar last year.

A number of the more recent shorts on the DVD were internet word of mouth hits � is the UK catching up with the US in terms of putting our shorts online?

I've not seen any films from this country that have connected on a level that Terry Tate or George Lucas in Love. Those films are on there because those are the kinds of films that get made in the States now. They're both pretty commercial, accessible, calling card films. They're the best examples of the kinds of films finding an audience in a different way. They're rare examples of shorts that actually get out into the mainstream, because most shorts tend to be watched by other people who make films, and they don't tend to connect particularly well with the general audience.

What is you next project as a filmmaker?

I've made three shorts. You often find it takes the same amount of energy to make a short than it does to make a feature. We're going to shoot a feature next year. But we'd never say no to coming back to doing a short, as long as we were getting paid for it.

What is your favourite of the films on the DVD?

I love Tim Burton's film [Vincent]. I think the strength and weakness of the American one is that it is so diverse, because the film industry there is so diverse. There are people making experimental movies and there are people making mainstream movies. We don't have that kind of diversity here, it tends to be more of a social realist tradition � which is reflected in the first DVD � at least you do get consistency there. The American one does fly about. But for me, I love Tim Burton, I love Terry Tate, I think it's great.

How well do you think Film Council's promotion of shorts through funding is going?

If the idea of getting involved is to bring new filmmakers through then it's got to be a good thing. I think it would be interesting to look at the conversion rate � to look at all the shorts of about three years ago and see how many people have gone on to make features. If the rate was very low I don't necessarily think it would be the fault of the Film Council. I think it's fantastic that they do support film because a lot of the more interesting filmmakers come through making shorts. David Lynch, Wes Anderson, Alexander Payne � these are people who have particular styles of work � and I don't think these people would have necessarily have found their way into the mainstream if they had to come through making commercials and TV. So, I think it's important there is support, but perhaps it could be more like the situation in France � there's more funding, and they actually encourage and make the terrestrial companies screen short films and pay a decent price for them. Here, there's nowhere on TV that shows shorts films, which is good for Cinema 16, but is not good for the filmmakers or for the audiences. I think there is an appetite, as this project shows. The Film Council does a great job supporting short films � the broadcasters don't.

www.cinema16.co.uk