Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse.....

mainstreetprod

mainstreetprod

Veteran
Found on Craigslist today:

VIDEOGRAPHERS NEEDED IMMEDIATELY


Citysquares.com, an innovative search website, is rapidly signing up small businesses for a free online listing and short VIDEO.
We are looking for videographers to capture 7-10 minutes of footage from small businesses in your area. All that is required is a tripod, camera, a shotgun or lavaliere mic and 20 minutes of your time. No editing involved - just shoot and upload the video clips to our FTP.

We pay $20 per video. Payments are made on a weekly basis via PayPal. This is easy money for those that want to make some extra cash!

Email us if interested, as territories are assigned by zip codes and our network is rapidly growing.



OK, with gas at nearly $4 a gallon, just how do you make any money here? And if a lav mic is needed, they must want an interview. Shoot b-roll and an interview in 20 minutes? Including drive time from almost anywhere, this couldn't be done in less than 3 hours. This is a new low. I do similar shoot only, no edit jobs for $125 and thought THAT was low. Do you feel insulted? Think anybody will fall for this?
 
Last edited:
I saw that here in ATL as well. I tend not to flag as I feel it is social Darwinism at work... if you are silly enough to take these jobs you are silly enough to get the end result as well. Really, the only reason I even look at CL is for the entertainment value of some of the posts (well, and the For Sale section too)...

The "freelancers" here are cutting their own throats to get work at this point, lowering their own prices even before anyone says anything to them. Music videos for $150 anyone?
 
I live in a small suburban town, and thought about going to local businesses/chamber of commerce/town government and pitching them some program that could be set up where I and other video producers in the immediate area would offer up some sort of service for local businesses where we could shoot interviews and footage, basically something similar. A little promo video for the business. Nothing too fancy. Just good lighting, sound, some interviews with the owner(s) intercut with some nice b-roll. Simple but possibly effective videos that they could put up on their websites or maybe use as a commercial. These wouldn't be video projects I'd make a huge sum on per shoot, but something that would not be too time consuming and could allow businesses to get a little video marketing for a reasonable price.

$20 per video is way too low for this type of thing of course. Another concern is I wouldn't want to just trust my payment would even be sent to me upon completion of the jobs, not by some company advertising for super low paying video jobs on Craigslist. I wonder what this company charges the businesses that sign up for this online network, what they get charged per video done by some poor sap who settles for doing these for $20 a pop.

This type of thing definitely drives home the sad truth that I am in the wrong business. I should have learned to code and make websites instead of learning how to produce video. At least in terms of making money on it (I do love doing film/video and photography for my own enjoyment).

mainstreetprod said:
OK, with gas at nearly $4 a gallon, just how do you make any money here? And if a lav mic is needed, they must want an interview. Shoot b-roll and an interview in 20 minutes? Including drive time from almost anywhere, this couldn't be done in less than 3 hours. This is a new low. I do similar shoot only, no edit jobs for $125 and thought THAT was low. Do you feel insulted? Think anybody will fall for this?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised if they expected a lot more than just an interview and 10 minutes of b-roll footage. I've found that the cheaper the client, the less upfront they are about their expectations or requirements for what they want in the end. Isn't it just lovely finding out through the course of a project that the client will keep on adding expectations and extra stuff that "they need"? As for the cheapo clients, sometimes it is like the faster you can get a project done the less chance the client has to add in all kinds of extra crap that they expect you to put in for no extra charge.
 
Last edited:
I hate to say it, but here's what's going to happen. I know for 100% you won't believe me, but I'm absolutely sure this is going to happen (I did market research in a similar situation). Here's what's going to happen - first, the price will drop. You'll be salivating to get $20. It'll drop to $10, eventually to $7 and then - then it will be for free. Absolutely free. But wait. You think that's all? Nope, it'll keep going. It will then start a new direction - you will be paying to do the job, and then there'll be the next guy willing to pay more. And that's how competition keeps going. So, at this point you think - this is impossible, a joke, insane. Nope, it's exactly what will happen.

Here's how. In any industry that's seen as glamorous, where the supply of eager workers is essentially infinite, the same trends apply. Take publishing - the only way to break into high-end publishing in New York, is to intern, work for free - you work for a year or so, and hope at the end they like you enough to hire you, or at least keep you in mind should a position open one day down the road. Given the extremely high cost of living in NYC, you are in essence subsidizing your job 100%, since you are working for free (one of the sad results is that often only the children of the wealthy and privileged can afford to do this, and so the privilege gets entrenched once they get a job). And entire business models have now been built on free labor. There's a lady who has built a wildly successful online business of interior design for both commercial spaces (restaurants, stores etc.), and homes. The way it works, is that she solicits people's portfolios for those who are willing to work for free. She gets a fee from the client (homeowner, or business) which she then does NOT share with the interior designer she hires based entirely on the portfolio. BUT, if the work is good, this down the line translates into PAID work for the interior designer based on the recommendation from this lady. So there you go - her ENTIRE business model depends 100% on FREE labor. You think this is not coming to the glamorous field of doing video work for bands or whatever? You're kidding yourself. Soon a business like this lady did for interior design will start popping up for video work. You say, well, I'll just charge what that business charges - but that's not how it will work. The way it will work is that the business will start getting becoming THE go-to place for video work, and people will not hire some unknown guy - they'll go for the established business. This has still not happened for video, but that's where the trends are, and that's where it will end up.

So the question is: are you going to grab those rich deals for $20 now, or are you going to wait until you have to work for free? Guess what, it's already here for many indies - ever see those ads for "need cinematographer to indie film - no pay, but credit for your reel; oh, and bring your own equipment". Soon the same mentality is coming to commercial video work - and I hate to tell you this, but you can't hide behind "quality work". Because cheap beats quality for most commercial work - the burger place or used car dealer down the street only cares about cheap, not "arty".

Get ready to work for free, because there are plenty of competitors. You know all those guys who spent mega $ for equipment - camera gear, sound, lights etc. etc. and have no work, and it sits in a corner gathering dust... they'll eagerly jump to work for free. Now get going - work for free, and work HARD, because there's always a competitor waiting in the wings.
 
On the contrary, I think the bubble will burst with cheap, shitty-looking videos because no one wants to watch those and the demand will be virtually zero.
 
Gary Huff said:
On the contrary, I think the bubble will burst with cheap, shitty-looking videos because no one wants to watch those and the demand will be virtually zero.
Click to expand...

That assumes the public is smart enough to want good videos over bad videos. I submit that they're not.
 
I think it is 50/50. I think in te long run it will come down to creativity. A YouTube aesthetic won't go anywhere for a while, BUT eventually people will get tired of poor quality, and realise that you get what you pay for.

That being said, I think industries like wedding videography may not fair so well.
 
Jester2138 said:
That assumes the public is smart enough to want good videos over bad videos. I submit that they're not.
Click to expand...

Regardless of content, they watch well-produced material all the time. Do you think the public would sit down in front of the TV to watch the latest crime drama if it was shot like some of the stuff on YouTube? Or poor acting like in a student short film? Of course not. They may watch ****, but Hollywood's **** is still miles beyond the complete utter wastes of time that one can readily find from no-talent hacks.
 
We've got a friend who, like so many ex-newspaper writers, is now a free-lance press agent. One of his regular clients is a major university in our area -- once a month he gets a list of the field projects that the university grad students are working, he goes out and shoots a few pic and writes some stories which he gets placed in various magazines and stuff. Recently they asked him if could shoot video -- he told them he had never done it and didn't even have a camera. They sent him a flip vid, now when he goes out to shoot pix he also shoots some video, cuts it together on iMovie and uploads it to social media. For this they send him an extra $200.00 per story,
Here's the kicker -- they called him and told him his video looked too good -- they wanted it to look like some kid had done it, thinking that it would more authentic. 200 and it looks too good? How do we compete?
 
$200, in addition to whatever they are paying him for a story, to shoot on equipment provided to him, is pretty damn good.

But you wouldn't do a chroma key shoot with a Flip cam, and you certainly don't want to do a sit-down interview with ONLY a Flip cam if you're trying to achieve some kind of professional presentation. There's a wide gulf between kid with a Flip cam and someone shooting a properly light interview with an EX1 or HPX-170 and capturing audio via a professional wireless lav. If the money gets too low to support the equipment necessary to get that, then people will have to go with ****. And people will stop watching because it will be poorly put together when they can get their video entertainment/information elsewhere that isn't embarrassing to watch.
 
I guess we'll see. I bet the public doesn't mind the quality going downscale. Look at what happened to audio. It's all mp3 and lossy - this way won out over audiophiles, and not only for playback but for recording - just look at all the compression going on, with almost total loss of dynamic range. And see what's happening to BluRay. I know we're all fans of BR here on dvxuser, but sadly, most people just don't care as much (Why Has BluRay Failed To Catch Hold). People make choices. If given a choice between great quality and convenience, guess what, convenience will win - hence the popularity and explosive growth of online streaming despite a massively worse quality compared to BR... yes, there will always be a market for the elite who demand the best, but for most people, it's good enough.

Which brings us to Hollywood. The market is fragmenting. Yes, you'll have the professionally made high-tech slick high-end where films like Avatar are made, and then you have the rest. No longer do you need to have slick and *professional* productions, more and more are totally low-fi, low quality DIY amateur productions with minimal or zero production values. This trend is most pronounced in the television market, that's where it's starting out - but bit by bit it's coming to Hollywood, just wait and watch. It'll end up like so many markets, including audio - there'll be the tiny high-end, and the big vast market of the cult of the immediate/keepin'it'real/down'n'dirty. Because, my friend, the down-and-dirty is an aesthetic all its own.

So now you are talking about the bread and butter of most work for independent videographers? Yep, that's going the way of "my kid cousin with his flip", and you just ain't gonna compete. Free or nothing... unless you make it into the tiny 1% of upper level, which does not apply to 99% of the one-man or a few-men video production companies out there.
 
OldCorpse said:
I guess we'll see. I bet the public doesn't mind the quality going downscale. Look at what happened to audio. It's all mp3 and lossy - this way won out over audiophiles,
Click to expand...

Not the same comparison at all. That's like saying you couldn't enjoy a movie on VHS. I can enjoy a movie on VHS, even though there are better options out there. Sometimes it's not about the format and that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I know we're all fans of BR here on dvxuser, but sadly, most people just don't care as much
Click to expand...
The article you linked to was mostly opinion. And, in my opinion, I see people from all walks of life in Fry's/Best Buy/Target/ect who purchase Blu-ray discs. I don't think it's quite a failure as some naysayers would like to say. It has far more competition now than any other format in history. And, again, has nothing to do with the topic at hand.


Which brings us to Hollywood. The market is fragmenting. Yes, you'll have the professionally made high-tech slick high-end where films like Avatar are made, and then you have the rest. No longer do you need to have slick and *professional* productions, more and more are totally low-fi, low quality DIY amateur productions with minimal or zero production values.
Click to expand...

What are these low-fi, amateurish productions that you speak of that are competing with Avatar in flying off shelves and people spending $20 a pop to download from the 'Net?

So now you are talking about the bread and butter of most work for independent videographers? Yep, that's going the way of "my kid cousin with his flip", and you just ain't gonna compete. Free or nothing... unless you make it into the tiny 1% of upper level, which does not apply to 99% of the one-man or a few-men video production companies out there.
Click to expand...
So, you tell me, do you spend your time watching these "kid cousin with Flip camera" made videos that are of anything but some random captured moment videos? Do you consume YouTube videos of sub-par quality that are trying to be more than just "look at the guy dancing on his rollerblades!" kind of video? Are you watching these informative, sit-down interview types shot on a camcorder with zero color correction with audio from the onboard mic and terrible framing?
 
Nektonic said:
This type of thing definitely drives home the sad truth that I am in the wrong business. I should have learned to code and make websites instead of learning how to produce video. At least in terms of making money on it (I do love doing film/video and photography for my own enjoyment).
Click to expand...

Just like video there are a small percentage of professionals still making money with code and making websites. This is however the exception. Sites like rent-coder have kids in Hungary doing entire sites for $20. Oh yeah and don't forget the iMovie of web design iWeb.
 
Gary Huff said:
Not the same comparison at all. That's like saying you couldn't enjoy a movie on VHS. I can enjoy a movie on VHS, even though there are better options out there. Sometimes it's not about the format and that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Click to expand...

I disagree, I thought the whole point of this thread was to show how production budgets and, to some extent, values have gone downhill in recent years due to the complete saturation of cheap, high-quality cameras in the public. In the audio world, .mp3's absolutely SUCK and yet they are the COMPLETELY dominant format. They achieved that because the public wasn't smart enough to demand higher production values and higher quality formats from record labels. We could also talk about the loudness war or all the over-produced pop, but that's a topic for another thread. But my point is just that as the equipment becomes so easily available, everybody and their grandmother thinks they're the next big thing and tries to "make it," which only results in a proliferation of worthless products and the public becoming less and less discerning between what's good and bad. The only way we will get out (and we will) is when the public realizes how much crap there is and finally begins to appreciate the quality stuff. It'll happen in a few years for audio, maybe a decade for film, I dunno.
 
So the music itself is now being produced and recorded directly to MP3 files? That's what the comparison would be stating to be accurate.
 
OldCorpse said:
Yep, that's going the way of "my kid cousin with his flip", and you just ain't gonna compete. Free or nothing…
Click to expand...

Now hold on fellas, I think our problems are solved. Looks like the Flip just went RIP. Read the bizarre article here.

Get ready to work for free, because there are plenty of competitors. You know all those guys who spent mega $ for equipment - camera gear, sound, lights etc. etc. and have no work, and it sits in a corner gathering dust... they'll eagerly jump to work for free. Now get going - work for free, and work HARD, because there's always a competitor waiting in the wings.
Click to expand...

Actually, I thank the good Lord everyday for the gigs I land. :engel017: I get to film models, food, yachts……

Work for free? Hell, I should be paying to be on some of these shoots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top