When a cinematographer is asking for too much $$$

[Hotwood]

Perhaps he should not keep his gear maintained and not be setting money aside for the nessary updates on new gear that people will want him to have in about a year or two. NOT!

Well, if the cinematographer rents his cameras and equipment himself, the professional versions of those tools tend to cost at least $500 at day as a package for him (and that's just with using things like T2i's, lenses, and equipment - just to rent a Red One it's $1,000 if you find it cheap). He has to make the amount of money back that he spends and a little more, or else he's throwing his own money out the window - he'd probably willingly throw it out the window if he got the chance to work on a Hollywood film instead of local things, but he probably wouldn't do that for a church production unless he's a very religious person who wants to donate for the cause. Chances are, $1,000 a day is not far off from very realistic.

But in my opinion, he could go much lower - I'd bet that he already owns his own equipment (with it paid off a billion times over) and is even probably using outdated equipment. When a cinematographer gets to this "outdated/paid off" point, they should be earning minimum wage like everyone else + whatever money they spend for gas, and rentals. I really doubt that any sort of local cinematographer is going to give you results that are worth $1,000 a day, they'll probably be worth more around $500 at most - I'd ask him to explain his equipment package (check for outdated cameras) and get him to explain the equipment he's putting forth and "how long" he's had the experience with that equipment (a good alternative question to "how long have you owned it?"). Chances are, he's charging 2x or 3x what he should be earning just because other baffoons clients in the town will fall for it.

Then again, who knows, maybe you snagged someone really talented and they have a super-filled schedule that only $1,000 can "break up". If he's not exactly clustered with projects though, most likely you can talk him down to something reasonable.

 

[dcarstens]

...
But in my opinion, he could go much lower - I'd bet that he already owns his own equipment (with it paid off a billion times over) and is even probably using outdated equipment. When a cinematographer gets to this "outdated/paid off" point, they should be earning minimum wage like everyone else + whatever money they spend for gas, and rentals. I really doubt that any sort of local cinematographer is going to give you results that are worth $1,000 a day, they'll probably be worth more around $500 at most - I'd ask him to explain his equipment package (check for outdated cameras) and get him to explain the equipment he's putting forth and "how long" he's had the experience with that equipment (a good alternative question to "how long have you owned it?"). Chances are, he's charging 2x or 3x what he should be earning just because other baffoons clients in the town will fall for it.

Then again, who knows, maybe you snagged someone really talented and they have a super-filled schedule that only $1,000 can "break up". If he's not exactly clustered with projects though, most likely you can talk him down to something reasonable.

Where/what is your market? I prefer producers with this mindset to lose my number.

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

It's becoming clear that this 'producer' doesn't work often with higher level professionals. $1,000 a day for a cinematographer isn't crazy for most big productions and the responses following demonstrate the same mind set.

This website isn't famous for big gigs/ big names... and perhaps that is the issue.

If you are a 'producer' and find yourself soliciting advice from a camera forum, you're probably doing your job wrong or you're an idiot.

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

Well, if the cinematographer rents his cameras and equipment himself, the professional versions of those tools tend to cost at least $500 at day as a package for him (and that's just with using things like T2i's, lenses, and equipment - just to rent a Red One it's $1,000 if you find it cheap). He has to make the amount of money back that he spends and a little more, or else he's throwing his own money out the window - he'd probably willingly throw it out the window if he got the chance to work on a Hollywood film instead of local things, but he probably wouldn't do that for a church production unless he's a very religious person who wants to donate for the cause. Chances are, $1,000 a day is not far off from very realistic.

But in my opinion, he could go much lower - I'd bet that he already owns his own equipment (with it paid off a billion times over) and is even probably using outdated equipment. When a cinematographer gets to this "outdated/paid off" point, they should be earning minimum wage like everyone else + whatever money they spend for gas, and rentals. I really doubt that any sort of local cinematographer is going to give you results that are worth $1,000 a day, they'll probably be worth more around $500 at most - I'd ask him to explain his equipment package (check for outdated cameras) and get him to explain the equipment he's putting forth and "how long" he's had the experience with that equipment (a good alternative question to "how long have you owned it?"). Chances are, he's charging 2x or 3x what he should be earning just because other baffoons clients in the town will fall for it.

Then again, who knows, maybe you snagged someone really talented and they have a super-filled schedule that only $1,000 can "break up". If he's not exactly clustered with projects though, most likely you can talk him down to something reasonable.

Who are you to make that assumption?! Sure, let's assume the DP bought $100,000 worth of equipment, paid it off, and is cheating you from your money. Get real.

 

[dcarstens]

Wow, it takes a special type of arrogance to set RPO off like that. Snapper123, my hat is off to you.

 

[Erik Olson]

That'll do it then.

 

[TimurCivan]

Well, if the cinematographer rents his cameras and equipment himself, the professional versions of those tools tend to cost at least $500 at day as a package for him (and that's just with using things like T2i's, lenses, and equipment - just to rent a Red One it's $1,000 if you find it cheap). He has to make the amount of money back that he spends and a little more, or else he's throwing his own money out the window - he'd probably willingly throw it out the window if he got the chance to work on a Hollywood film instead of local things, but he probably wouldn't do that for a church production unless he's a very religious person who wants to donate for the cause. Chances are, $1,000 a day is not far off from very realistic.

But in my opinion, he could go much lower - I'd bet that he already owns his own equipment (with it paid off a billion times over) and is even probably using outdated equipment. When a cinematographer gets to this "outdated/paid off" point, they should be earning minimum wage like everyone else + whatever money they spend for gas, and rentals. I really doubt that any sort of local cinematographer is going to give you results that are worth $1,000 a day, they'll probably be worth more around $500 at most - I'd ask him to explain his equipment package (check for outdated cameras) and get him to explain the equipment he's putting forth and "how long" he's had the experience with that equipment (a good alternative question to "how long have you owned it?"). Chances are, he's charging 2x or 3x what he should be earning just because other baffoons clients in the town will fall for it.

Then again, who knows, maybe you snagged someone really talented and they have a super-filled schedule that only $1,000 can "break up". If he's not exactly clustered with projects though, most likely you can talk him down to something reasonable.

Your statement completely fails to recognize the cinematographer as a creative entity. You just relegated him to a operators/technicians position. I (and others in this thread) dont get paid, and called back because i'm cheap, ( i most certainly am not) i get called back for work for several reasons. 1: My eye. 2: my managerial skills 3: my contacts and ability to put together a crack team 4: my sunny diposition on set (seriously) 5lastly)my gear.

I get paid what i get paid because hiring me saves the production money. I move quickly, and can keep the ball rolling, and get more shots in a day by managing my crew efficiently, and making tough decisions.