How much can DP's make?

I have shot features for as low as $100/day (it's been a while) and even supplied all the gear for that cost. (I know sounds dumb, but it was when I was trying to break in and later on one movie when I was teaching and was off for the summer so I already had a paycheck coming, so it was my summer vacation project.)

It all depends on budget and what you bring to the table. On a sub-$10,000 movie don't expeect more than $150/day and you bring the camera. On movies in the $30,000-100,000 range don't expect a lot more, maybe $250. Above that range, but under a mil, I've made $200-500/day. On commericals, it's been around $1000/day.

I saw the contract for an "A" list DP on an "A" movie and he was making around $20,000 a week with a ton of perks, like 1st class travel for he and his family.

Scott
 
What a DP pulls in depends on the budget of the movie but even average cinematogrpaher make good bucks. On a low budget independent film many DPs make $300/day. In fact, it is difficult to get a skilled one to work for less regardless of budget.
 
ASC is believe is basically referral-based. You need a certain number of sponsors to write a letter to the admission board. Not sure if there is anything more involved, but you have to have done enough good work to get some attention. Usually would help if you were an AC for an ASC member, so you have some connections.
 
Barry_Green said:
ASC's not a union. IATSE is the union.
Click to expand...
Barry,

That was my understanding. The ASC is an organization or guild for cinematographers one that you have to be invited to join.

Is this correct?

Chris
 
they represent them selves as a union........ :huh:

(i rephrase union into "Really Super cool club" )
 
Last edited:
I have to disagree, the ASC does not behave as a union at all. They are not involved in collective bargaining nor any other activity that is "union like". It is certainly a well regarded society and many of its members are IATSE members, but ASC itself is a society not a union.
 
I foresee some interesting times in $1 million and down productions once RED becomes established. With a large number of cameras in the hands of many folk who would previously not have a high end camera at their disposal, I can easily see low-budget producers who will embrace RED for the economics looking to only hire DP's with their own cameras, a number of whom will be eager to virtually give away the rental or at least undercut the rental houses to get the job. These producers will exploit this by asking in the interview process, do you own a RED and how little can we pay for it? Will you throw it in for free? No? Well, we are talking to some other prospects who will do that...love to hire you but there's not much money on this one....blah blah blah.

Naturally if a given DP doesn't have the chops to pull off a job, it's likely that they will be replaced before long with or without their camera rental, but as f'd up as it sounds, I have a strong sense this scenario will play out for a while.
 
imageonepictures said:
The ASC is an organization or guild for cinematographers one that you have to be invited to join.

Is this correct?
Click to expand...
Yep. There are many (like the British society, BSC, or the Editor's society, ACE). Having those initials behind your name is a mark of honor, that the best peers in the business have decided to admit you to their very exclusive club.

The unions are the DGA, WGA, SAG, and for below-the-line workers, IATSE. Those are collective-bargaining organizations that occasionally go on strike, etc.

Then there are exclusive societies such as the Academy (AMPAS), ACE, ASC, and Producer's Guild (PGA).
 
CharlesPapert said:
I foresee some interesting times in $1 million and down productions once RED becomes established. With a large number of cameras in the hands of many folk who would previously not have a high end camera at their disposal, I can easily see low-budget producers who will embrace RED for the economics looking to only hire DP's with their own cameras, a number of whom will be eager to virtually give away the rental or at least undercut the rental houses to get the job. These producers will exploit this by asking in the interview process, do you own a RED and how little can we pay for it? Will you throw it in for free?...
Click to expand...

Let's hope not! If, as well suggested by Overlandfilms in a previous post, we keep personal labour rates separate from equipment rates (guided by the equipment hire company rates) we should be able to resist producers trying to lump everything into a single low-ball figure. If a producer only wants to hire the Red kit, but you as the owner don't want to risk that, then you insist on being hired as Red equipment assistant or something at a low rate, but the Red stuff costs full industry rate (perhaps minus an explicitly stated reasonable discount as you would be unable to offer the same amount of backup support as a facilities house).

Lots of undercutting by Red owners will only devalue our investments. If we occasionally do a favour or a freebie, we need to make it clear that this is not our usual rate and is a "one-off"!
 
Last edited:
Scott_Spears said:
I have shot features for as low as $100/day (it's been a while) and even supplied all the gear for that cost. (I know sounds dumb, but it was when I was trying to break in and later on one movie when I was teaching and was off for the summer so I already had a paycheck coming, so it was my summer vacation project.)

It all depends on budget and what you bring to the table. On a sub-$10,000 movie don't expeect more than $150/day and you bring the camera. On movies in the $30,000-100,000 range don't expect a lot more, maybe $250. Above that range, but under a mil, I've made $200-500/day. On commericals, it's been around $1000/day.

I saw the contract for an "A" list DP on an "A" movie and he was making around $20,000 a week with a ton of perks, like 1st class travel for he and his family.

Scott
Click to expand...


OT: You DPd/operated on the original Battlestar Galactica what makes you my hero of the week!

On topic: Were I live it is common that the "important guys" eg the DP may get a low dayrate/project fixum but also get revenues if the movie makes any money (what doesn´t happen too often;o)), how is it in the states?
 
Eric:

I too surely hope this will not be the case, but outside of smaller markets where there is less competition, I wouldn't be too surprised if it did. This happened in the Steadicam world; there are a number of operators in LA who are going out on low-budget projects for less than the projected rental of the RED, and this with a full-blown Steadicam rig AND labor combined. There will be a large number of folks who will be emptying out their bank accounts, taking out loans etc. to build a RED package and then when the work doesn't come pouring in at full-rate, will take whatever deal they can get just to make some money (or build relationships etc).

This may sound cynical, but I've been around the owner/operator block a few times and also know how low-budget producers like to exploit this type of situation by playing people off each other.

But as you said--I would love to not see it happen.
 
CharlesPapert said:
Eric:

I too surely hope this will not be the case, but outside of smaller markets where there is less competition, I wouldn't be too surprised if it did. This happened in the Steadicam world; there are a number of operators in LA who are going out on low-budget projects for less than the projected rental of the RED, and this with a full-blown Steadicam rig AND labor combined. There will be a large number of folks who will be emptying out their bank accounts, taking out loans etc. to build a RED package and then when the work doesn't come pouring in at full-rate, will take whatever deal they can get just to make some money (or build relationships etc).

This may sound cynical, but I've been around the owner/operator block a few times and also know how low-budget producers like to exploit this type of situation by playing people off each other.

But as you said--I would love to not see it happen.
Click to expand...
Good post!

overlandfilms said:
Your resume, guild affiliation (if any) and what you're willing to work for on any given project, not the camera you own, dictates where you fall on the matter of day rate.
Click to expand...
Another good post.

I'd like to interject the producer’s perspective into this already lively discussion.

A talented producer knows that you NEVER hire anyone for the equipment they own. That should be repeated in another way. Only a BAD producer hires CREW for what equipment they happen to own. So, if you are an owner-operator (or plan on becoming one) beware of jobs with producers more interested in your equipment than your services.

Having lived and worked as a camera person in a small market before moving to LA, what I've seen happen is owner-ops (camera/steadicam in particular) are only more likely to be hired over a person WITHOUT any kind of reel and resume. However, it only gives a leg up for that lucrative spec/student/ terrible freebie job market. You know this kind... You can hear them coming a mile a way....

"We don't have much (or any) money for this one, but we're going to shoot a big money project next month..."

Yeah right. Do you also have a bridge for sale?

On these lousy jobs owner-ops are usually overworked, under appreciated and obviously not being fairly compensated; especially considering they are investing their own time and equipment into something that is quite possibly never going to see the light of day. It's easy for the owner-ops to become more than a bit disgruntled. Producers then become unhappy with the job performance (even if beggars can't be choosers) and then this can snowball into DISASTEROUS results for all involved. Anyone who's been around the block has seen or heard of at least one production which completely imploded.

The latest thing I'm hearing about are producers (yes, the bad ones) hiring small camera owner-ops (DV/HDV) for as little as $50/day (yes, with equipment), mostly for reality/documentary TV. But don't worry too much. These $50/day reality jobs seem to be fazing out now. Not because the "bad producers" suddenly got smart and decided to hire a professional. No, they are now telling Field Producers they MUST also be able to shoot.

Wonder why some reality TV looks so bad? One of my clients had 8x Field Producers- producing, shooting and mixing wireless mics.... all while ON ICE SKATES. Even if someone has technical mastery of equipment, when one person has to multi-task like that, everything suffers. I won't say the name of the show, but with the ratings it received most of America saw it.

I.
 
Illya Friedman said:
Only a BAD producer hires CREW for what equipment they happen to own. I.
Click to expand...

Mmmm...I agree in theory, but there are rationales that I have heard that have a certain logic (but one can easily counter them as well). Such as: "owner/operated gear is better maintained than the cheaper rental houses, and the guy I hire with his gear is more motivated to both keep it in good condition, and to do a good job lest he lose a doubly-lucrative gig". Also, "milking" a hungry crewperson to rent his gear for less than the prevailing rental rates is good for the bottom line. Again, I'm not condoning this behavior (quite the opposite!) but it will help maintain the budget. Of course, if either the gear is shoddy or the worker is incompetent, ultimately this is not a bargain for the production. However, even at the very highest level of production it's usually the case that there is a specific and fixed budget to be met and not exceeded at the beginning of the job, even if the choices made to achieve that ends up costing more by the end. Crazy yes, but therein lies one of the more fascinating (and frustrating) things about the business of the film business.
 
CharlesPapert said:
Such as: "owner/operated gear is better maintained than the cheaper rental houses
Click to expand...

I won't name names, but some rental houses don't do any preventative maintenance. Ever. It primarily is cheap-o DV/HDV cam houses that seem to be the worst offenders. Some owner-ops are the same way unfortunately, and as a producer it's hard to know what kind of quality you're getting. We regularly clean, repair or reject other rental house cameras when they come in for a subrental. Some places are usually fine, but other have to be checked extra carefully and are sometimes rejected.

I do get a fair number of calls from productions who've hired an owner-op and then the camera goes down during the shoot. The rental house flys in a new body to the rescue, and then the costs of the rental end up coming out of the DPs pocket. It's a lousy place to be for an owner-op.

I.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top