Quoting an for Editing a Feature Film

lhmaloney

lhmaloney

Well-known member
A company recently approached my company about editing their Dramatic feature film. They have already wrapped production, I haven't seen the footage yet, & I do not know the original budget, however, based on the little details they have provided its clearly an under 20k budgeted film, maybe even under 10k. So my question is how do I quote them for editing their feature down to a 90 minute film. Just the edit, no color correction or color grading or audio mastering etc. Just the basic edit. BTW they need the final edit completed by feb 1st, so my personal deadline is to have it done by Jan. 15th, so basically we have a month & a half.

Thank you any feedback is greatly appreciated.:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG):Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
 
Looks like it will be a project base fee rather than a weekly fee. Make sure the "end" is well defined for the project based fee. Also what is their deadline? Some films need to time to extract the story and really make it work - 6-7 weeks might not be enough time to get there. As long as the producer/director are aware of that, then no problem.

Michael
 
1st of all thanx for your feedback. My partner got feedback from them. They don't know alot, they don't even know what a slate & a script supervisor is, didn't take editing notes etc. So yeah we'll have to go over a couple things, they'll have to fix a couple things before I even quote it
 
Yikes...On the low end scale I've been paid between 10 to 20k just to edit a feature ,so if that's their whole budget, there is no way you are going to get paid what you should. On top of not having a script supervisor, or a slate, or editing notes, it sounds like something I'd pass on without thinking twice. But if you need the credit and experience, just realize that when you break down the time you're going to spend on it with the money they'll likely pay you, you'll probably be making less than minimum wage.
 
Batutta said:
Yikes...On the low end scale I've been paid between 10 to 20k just to edit a feature ,so if that's their whole budget, there is no way you are going to get paid what you should. On top of not having a script supervisor, or a slate, or editing notes, it sounds like something I'd pass on without thinking twice. But if you need the credit and experience, just realize that when you break down the time you're going to spend on it with the money they'll likely pay you, you'll probably be making less than minimum wage.
Click to expand...


Yeah, thats the conclusion we've came to, & its a horror film, & some of the editing techniques utilized in Horror nowadays, YIKES & YIKES, I need the credit not the experience, however, I submitted in a reasonable offer, not as high as your 10k number but close, so im waiting to negotiate but, yeah thats independent filmmaking @ its finest lol
 
I haven't edited a feature yet, but after working on this short... I'd charge $10k just for the ASSISTANT editor duties. I had to completely reformat the script so I could get scriptsync to work. Then half the takes don't have slate. Then there is the transcoding prior to cutting, etc. Yea $20k would be the MINIMUM I'd consider to cut a feature length film.
 
Personally, I wouldn't even bother to bid on a project like this. The timeframe is too short, and there appear to be a lot of technical issues that will burn up a lot of that time.

And, if they didn't bother to use slates or make script notes, I'm guessing that they didn't bother to hire a sound recordist, or to light the picture, so their sound & picture will likely be crappy.

And my personal rule of thumb, if they first start looking for an editor after they wrap shooting, they pay by the hour.
 
The first freelance film gig I did was only $2000 for 2 months of editing for a film with a $20k budget.

I knew that was chump change considering my gas and meal costs, but I wanted a film credit that badly.

So many people want to get their foot in the door so bad, that they would literally do it for free.
 
paulears said:
Are we talking film, as opposed to video?
Click to expand...
No. I am inferring that they implied digital. They talk of no digital intermediate or film scanning of any sorts. While they may have already scanned the film, this is with an almost certainty not the case.

Just look at the quote below:
lhmaloney said:
...however, based on the little details they have provided its clearly an under 20k budgeted film, maybe even under 10k.
Click to expand...

This budget alone gives me the impression that it is not shot on film.

Be mindful that this is only an educated assumption. Just look at El Mariachi, 16mm feature with $7,000, people can do crazy things with low funds sometimes.
 
Marc Villafan said:
Be mindful that this is only an educated assumption. Just look at El Mariachi, 16mm feature with $7,000, people can do crazy things with low funds sometimes.
Click to expand...

I really hate when people use El Mariachi as an example. Yea, you can do it on that budget if you have a LOT of talented people willing to work for free. If that was a common shoot, that would have cost 10x as much.
 
Not to mention that the version we saw in theaters had an additional $1M or so of work done on sound etc.

Michael
 
PerroneFord said:
I really hate when people use El Mariachi as an example. Yea, you can do it on that budget if you have a LOT of talented people willing to work for free. If that was a common shoot, that would have cost 10x as much.
Click to expand...

Yes yes definitely. That's why I said sometimes. Though I shouldve said rarely. El Mariachi was just the only one to pop in my head. Regardless, my point had nothing to do with El Mariachi, and everything to do with it being unlikely that the thread starters offer was shot on film.

Heck, even Robert Rodriguez embraced digital for it's economical benefits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top