music videos

Steve Laramie

Steve Laramie

Veteran
My friend and I who both have allot of film experience just no music video experience plan on working together on music videos. Not sure how to price this since we havnt broken in yet. I really dont want to work for free since I have allot of other experience. What do you recomend and what can you expect to start making once youve broken in?
 
Wow, where to start? What can the client afford and what do they want? My base rate starts at $250-350 for filming a set doing just a simple one camera job on sticks and on location (live).

Now when it goes to a produced video, the price goes from a set rate to a day rate of 350.00 per operator plus expenditures (rentals, media, etc.) and travel. This does not include editing. I charge an hourly rate for that, based on the client's needs (or they can use someone else if they desire).

But sometimes, when I see a real opportunity by doing a favor, I might charge nothing or next to nothing. I am about to land a MAJOR video contract (if everything works out) because of a "favor" I did for an employee of that company.

I look it like this, if I can get more on the back end than up front, I price accordingly.

But that is me.
 
Because what I sell is my time, I have never priced projects differently by the flavor of the project.
I just charge my hourly rate or day rate.
 
Hmm

Hmm

Well, I've went over this before, but I don't really believe a music video is a guy with a camera recording a performance ;) That's just not a music video. Watch MTV2 or Fuse, and you know what a real music video is.

If I were charging for a video I wouldn't do it for less than $5,000. Anything short of that there is no chance I can even make the thing, and with that kind of budget I'm probably not making anything, but I might do it for fun.

I'm not sure if you've never done a music video if you'd get an opportunity to do a paid video at any decent rate, but I could be wrong. I mean it's certainly possible, depending on the level of your other work.
 
Yeah im not talking about shooting a show in the back with a tripod and camera. Im talking about like storytelling music videos.
 
First Music video i did was for $300 and have worked my way up to getting budgets around 8K and up. However, like Jonathan said, compared to what i make shooting for networks, i make barely anything off music videos because of the mass amount of time and other cost that is involved (I dont do band performances so anything i do always ends up being involved and time very time consuming). I'm working on a MV for the next two weeks and i have to keep reminding myself that having a polished video will make all the work worth it.

If this is your first video and its something you really want to do more of, get asss much money as you can from the band, and then put it all back into the video. You'll never make much from producing music videos, so look as it as a creative outlet. Its very hard to make a living directing music video, something that even some of my friends, who have directed some bigger videos, will admit too.
 
Yeah, it's very hard, it's probably the hardest pursuit in the world as far as making a living, that's no joke. There are probably less than a dozen music video directors who make a living exclusively from doing music videos. Heck, I'm really not sure there are even that many, most everyone does commercial work on the side or just quits music videos to get into features.

But music videos remain valuable, despite all of that, because they are a great training ground for many of the world's most talented directors. You look through all of the big directors today and a huge number of them started in music videos, or that's where they gained their recognition and developed their style. So it's not so much a way to make a lot of money as it's a nice way to show you have a great visual style and can tell a story quickly and efficiently, you have original ideas, etc. A lot of music video directors get offered commercial work.

I've known people coming the other direction, too, though, from commercial work to music videos, mainly just for fun. It's still a lot of fun even if you can't make much money doing it.

I think in a perfect future, I would just focus on making feature films mainly, or directing television episodes, but from time to time, perhaps 2-3 times a year, I'd direct a music video. The thing is they really are a lot of work. For a music video to be worth my time and using my equipment, I'd have to be paid at least $1,000 a week even at minimum, then my equipment would have to be paid fairly for its usage, I mean I'd definitely need to make $7,000 or so for each video, and that's not going to happen. You'd be lucky to find a budget of $7,000 total, haha, and be able to scrape maybe $1,500 from that possibly. But, like Watson said, you're basically better putting that into the video because it's for fun anyway, haha.
 
1000 for a video is pretty cheap, as you really dont want to direct and shoot, so its at least a two man gig, you have to charge your rates, making sure you have enough to pay for your camera man and his equipment. this alone can be well over 1000 per day. (this is why I'm a DP) then you need to either edit, or hire and editor, either way it takes time or money, ans time is money so either way it takes money. this is assuming no vfx, one day shoot, with night shots, you're looking at paying your 2 man crew and editor, at least 2 grand. if its not a night shot, you may get away with half. but once you pay your camera, and editor, food, and all that jazz, make sure there is money left over to pay you for all your efforts.

Jason Miller
 
My last music video had: Director, DP, 1st A.D., UPM, Editor, Key Grip, Grip, Gaffer, Swing, Actor, Actress, extras (3-4), two PAs, 1st A.C., hair/makeup artist, B camera operator, and probably someone else I'm forgetting. This 2-3 person crew idea is very cute, but it's also amateur hour ;) If you want to make amateur work great. I personally don't.
 
JonathanLB said:
My last music video had: Director, DP, 1st A.D., UPM, Editor, Key Grip, Grip, Gaffer, Swing, Actor, Actress, extras (3-4), two PAs, 1st A.C., hair/makeup artist, B camera operator, and probably someone else I'm forgetting. This 2-3 person crew idea is very cute, but it's also amateur hour ;) If you want to make amateur work great. I personally don't.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but the point of having a business is......to make money, and be profitable. Otherwise you are not running an actual business, you are just seeking justification for your passion and hobby, and that hopefully you achieve some fame in the process.

Someone else already mentioned how their margin was low. I feel bad that they are in that position, and, as a businessperson to businessperson, I would say there needs to be some modification in your business model. Either raise rates or cut overhead. Any business, in order to actually thrive, needs to be financially successful. That means actually making a healthy profit. Barely squeaking by means: no expansion of the business safely.

My goal is to run a business and not a "fame" factory. I am not looking to be famous or have my name on a One Page. I want to afford to get what I want, and actually make money and enjoy what I do. I am not in it for fame or glory. I don't need to have my name attached to some big "star" for me to be comfortable or satisfied.

My running a small crew may seem like "amateur hour" to some, no big, the only people I need to impress are my clients and their fanbase. And what my company does has impressed our clients, enough for return business, and referrals from them (word of mouth advertising). I'd say "amateur hour" is working for me and my company. My overhead is low and my margins are above standard. Isn't that the goal of any real business?.

The big jobs are few and far between, especially when you are starting out. Local bands, my demographical focus, don't have a huge bankroll to hire a huge production crew. But "amateur hour" gets me new clients every week, which adds up. And if one of my clients does hit big, I wonder who they will call first for that big budget dream shoot? Someone with a few credits of "Big Name" features or someone they know and trust not to inflate their budget.

Working a big shoot is great, but between those shoots, I have bills to pay and new equipment to acquire, but that is just me. Look down on it/me if you want, and I will accept that criticism and will think of it every time I make a deposit in the bank.

I'd rather turn down business because I don't have the time, than because they can't afford my "lofty" prices. In the end, who turns a better profit?

The reason for this post is not to slam anyone else, but to say I am proud of the quality of work we turn out, and nobody claiming what we do is "amateur hour" is going to deter me or even undermine the hard work my people have done.

I promise not to look down my nose at anyone else, just because they aren't doing major feature films or pulling in X thousands of dollars for a single production. Some of us are happy just satisfying the clients we have and keep.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry but I cannot disagree more strongly with your philosophy. When you set yourself up to be a small guy, you will always be a small guy. You are establishing yourself as a little guy who does little work. If one of your clients makes it big, they won't go to you, they'll come to someone like me. They will always see you as a little guy, because that's how you've sold yourself. I've sold myself as a big guy, the kind that you can't afford unless you have the money, and the quality of my work reflects that as well. When people pay $5,000 for something, they're going to think it's better than if they paid $500, even if it's the same thing. Numerous psychological studies and research have proven this fact. I'd rather sit home and not be doing consistent work than selling my name cheaply. Not only can I afford not to make consistent income to pay my bills, but I know that when I do get projects, they'll be worth my time and effort because I've sold myself as something bigger than just another little guy.

Let me give you an analogy to explain what I mean. If I'm hiring a gaffer now for $200/day, and I get a huge budget to shoot a feature, I mean huge relative to the work I've done, let's say $4 million, and now my gaffer is going to make $600/day, am I going to just hire a $200/day gaffer and pay him $600? Heck no. I'm going to hire a $600/day gaffer, someone who always charges that much. They may not be any better than the $200/day guy, but I already have established that this guy is a $200/day guy, this other guy is a $600/day guy. In my eyes, they are at different levels. That is how people think. The key to success is making yourself scarce and coveted, a commodity, someone who costs a lot of money and that other people can brag about having. "Yeah man we had (so and so) direct our music video, it was awesome!" Rather than, "Yeah the dude who charges like $500 did our music video, it was nice." They will always see you as a little guy with that mentality. It means in the short term, you will definitely make more money than I will. But in the long term, I think you're selling yourself short and limiting your potential.

Your business has little opportunity for growth if you can't take the bigger clients anyway, because eventually your time is all used up and you can't afford to do more projects because you'll lack the time to do them. It's good to be busy, but try raising prices on your existing clients. It's nearly impossible. Once you sell yourself small, you will always be small.

When I see someone working as a PA or a grip on my set, I afford them the same respect and dignity of anyone else, but I now see them as a grip or PA. I will keep calling them back for grip positions if they're good at their jobs, and I will respect the work they do and really appreciate it! But I am not going to call them and ask them to be a DP on my next project, because in my eyes they're a grip. First impressions are very important like that. When I started, I decided I didn't want to be any of those positions, I called myself a director, and now people call me a director because that's who I've shown myself to be.

So it's not a matter of looking down on you, because I don't look down on anyone, you are out there doing work which is great, it's just a matter of disagreeing with your business philosophy. I had the choice to start taking work at a low budget range, the pathetic $500 to $2,000 music video clients. I couldn't make enough money on those clients for me to want to bother with them. They're not worthwhile. I'd rather someone else work their butts off to squeeze a few hundred bucks profit out of those clients, rather than sell myself as a guy who can do ultra cheap work like that. No thanks. You'll have to grind it out for numerous low budget music videos like that to make enough money to get by.

It's like the joke about the two DPs talking to each other. One says, "Yeah this month has been great, I've been busy all of the time, I have worked 15 days this month and made about $4,000!" The other DP says, "That's great, good for you." The first asks, "So what about you, how many days have you worked?" "Just three days." "Oh, that's too bad." "Yeah, I made $5,000." So would you rather be the guy who gets paid very highly when he does work, or the one who works constantly and doesn't get paid much? I know where I stand.

But I'm not faulting your approach in the sense that you have bills to pay, you have equipment you want to buy, you enjoy what you do, that's all great stuff. I mean, who is to fault a guy for doing what he loves? I'm just saying that for myself and my business, I disagree with your approach.

I also share different philosophies from you and perhaps most people. I don't care much about the money. I already have money. I'll never have to worry about money in my life. I want the fame. If I can't become famous eventually, it will be disappointing. Now I'm not saying that I base my entire success on that, but I want to be in an industry and doing work where I have that chance. I wouldn't have pursued any career path that didn't have a chance for fame and fortune. I love filmmaking for a lot more reasons than that, and ultimately I could be satisfied just being a working director getting by from project to project, because I love this industry, it's fun no matter what you're making. But the CHANCE and slight hope of fame is what keeps me going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top