Working for free or low pay

grinner said:
Well I have billed mainly as an editor for the last 20 years or so. An animating one at that.
As budgets tighten, I see from my chair where money was waisted. I edit shows of crews of many knowing I could grab my HDV camera and do it for a fraction... so I pitched that and got it.
Now, as a one man band, I travel, I conceive, I shoot/produce/dorect, then come back home and edit it. In my hayday, billing a grand a day was no problemo but today it's quite challenging, unless in tight with a long-lasting client not feeling budget restraints today.
Now, as mentioned, I got my day rate back up to where it belongs... by saving them a boatload of money on a production that use to cost them an easy five figures. I flat bid these at like 6k now. Thats 1.5 days of travel, a day or two of shooting and the rest for post.
I'd not be back up to my wanted day rate today if I were an editor waiting on a gig.
I go claim that gig with my camera now and bring the post home. I get better content than their big crews, ensuring this lasts beyond the depression.
Now was this risk? Heeeell yeah it was, the middlemen I cut were my very clients. Thats either success or suicide right there. All or nothing is required sometimes. I've never had a problem going all in. I think that is what is required today.. risk takers with confidence to back it up.
Click to expand...

Your professional experience gives us a real window on the economics of digital production today. It's a quickly changing landscape, and you combined thorough knowledge with an ability to adapt. So good on ya man!

I know too many editors who still don't know how to turn on their edit suite (they have "assistants" for that). I don't know where they're going to be in another 5 years if they don't get with the program.
 
There are a few old linear editors out there who still sit and await a timecode from the back of the room. Thse folks are roosting, not competing. I mean, it's far less work to be a media processor... the go between producer and computer than is is to be a creator. It's just not near as fun. This is why ya never see these dudes smile.
It always surprises me when an editor asks if I use things like AE or PS. Of course I do, I make finished shows. It dawns on me not all editors make finished shows. Some just make edits. It's these folks who justify rates of creators.
 
basspig said:
Hey, I'm that "idiot" on Craigslist offering two-EX1 shoots for bands and small ensembles in my local area and I STILL don't get any business from CL! And this is what I gave for $500: http://exposureroom.com/wwconcert
It's not all amateurs out there in this hard situation. It's also the pros who care about their work who are competing against kids with camcorders and also a prevailing idea that video is unimportant to the event.
Click to expand...
You!!!! haha! you're the guy that gave me that "amateurish" review on hulu.com. nice to meet you, basspig.
 
Busted Mark!

Uh, oh. You will never work in this town again! ;-) You don't want to cross Zak, he is the one that has pull in this town, his stuff is on the Oscar telecast tomorrow.

Can't wait to see your piece Zak. I am stoked for you.

Dan
 
Hey, I just call 'em like I see 'em. Really, the cultural depravity in that short was depressing, and again, I was constantly distracted by the jerky camera movements. There seems to be a binge of "Bourne Identity" style camera work lately. I first encountered this in "The French Connection" and I hated it then. And I still find that it detracts, rather than ads to the story. But then, there wasn't much of anything I'd call a story there. That's my honest opinion. Would you rather I lied and said it was an awesome film? And I do hope that if and when I manage to produce my first short, that folks will give me their HONEST appraisal, not couched in kind plattitudes.
I'd give UNZEIT far more credit for production values and plot, to compare something on roughly the same level of capital investment. For the most part, indie films are boring, not worth the film they're printed on. Try making something original, with one of the 43 or so plots that aren't used constantly and with an intellectually, thought-provoking plot. It must be the smog out there that is responsible for these loony films. ;)
 
Ryan Paige said:
Mr. Ellison did get one thing backwards, though. He is the a-hole.

But I guess it works for him.
Click to expand...

If you say so. I think he's awesome. The other people are just pansies. I guess you have a choice in life, be a pansy like JD in Scrubs, or be Kelso / The Janitor / Cox, an alpha male. Personally I don't gravitate towards girly men, in fact I find their sight a bit sickening to my sense of good taste, so I like a writer who can stand up for himself and be a man. ;)
 
chill, piggy. i wasn't complaining. you will be hard pressed to meet another filmmaker who encourages the same level of truthful dialogue and interaction between artist and audience/community. IFHY's awards and achievements on the festival circuit and in securing distribution are well documented on this site and throughout the web. This humbling and generous affirmation of my work has emboldened me and freed me to take criticism at face value and not to take offense if the film fails to resonate with some viewers. I know my niche and I play to it. On a broader scale there is very real value in deconstructing the trends that emerge in the feedback we've received on this short and our two feature films. A transparent and open process speaks to the very heart of what we're doing at Sabi Pictures.
 
Last edited:
Zak, I want to thank you for all the behind the scenes info you've given the DVXUser community about marketing the film to bloggers, film festivals, etc. which I find to be the hardest part of film/TV making. And congrats on the Oscars (if it's true, I just saw the post above about it)!
 
adam, you're very welcome. I'm helping to develop some free and open services with the folks at the workbook project that should help all of us do the same. and yes, it's true. I cut the In Memoriam which will be the last "set piece" of the show right before presenting the last big awards of the night.
 
I thhink one has to factor in overhead vs someone who owns all of their equipment. If someone outright owns everything they have, from cams to editing suite, and they work from a home thats completely morgage free, this person has an advantage in the market to charge lower rates, because now the majority of his work is now profit. but if your financing your equipment and your home, or work out of a rented facility you half to charge more in order to make a profit.

so, I wouldn't say a person has to be a low balling amatuer because he undercuts competitors, I would say he's able to adjust to the fluctuating market more so than one who has the overhead without that much adverse affect, due to his non overhead.

I have 3 kids, so at this point in the economy, if push come to shove, (will work for food).
 
Well I'm now working from home in a suite that is paid for but I in no way kid myself into the mentality that I have no overhead. I have exactly six figures more than a freelancer does, regardless of when I paid it off. It still came off the table I feed my family on.
While haggling may be required through this depression, it would be a mistake to compete on the level of a freelancer if you own your gear. You at least have to charge the rental fee they'd be paying elsewhere.
 
reem12 said:
... If someone outright owns everything they have, from cams to editing suite, and they work from a home thats completely morgage free, this person has an advantage in the market to charge lower rates, because now the majority of his work is now profit. but if your financing your equipment and your home, or work out of a rented facility you half to charge more in order to make a profit.
Click to expand...


I'm mortgage-free, but not tax-free! My property taxes cost me 3X as much today as the mortgage on my first home did. Definately not as low on overhead as I'd like to see. My second biggest expense is electricity--to the tune of ~$500/month on average. Everything else is cake. When I was single, I was living on $1850/year, not including taxes and auto insurance. I'm still paying off my second EX1, but all other equipment was paid for by the sale of my vintage audio gear over the past 2 years, and the winnings from a couple of personal injury cases when I was rear-ended at traffic lights. Otherwise, I'd eating cat food and setting my thermostat to 50ºF like most other retired folks I know...
 
I watched the video. Funny rant, a little truth to it (makes me think of CraigsList employment), but mainly a funny rant.

Same subject, different twist:

I am not an amateur. I am a business owner. I get paid well and should get paid well for my products and services, just like any other business. Yet, my business plan specifically incorporates Pro-Bono work, namely for 501c3s. I cannot begin to quantify all of the exposure, networking, opportunity and well paid work that has come from producing these 'free-bees'. Has it taken away work from another professional? Its possible, but that is what free-market business is all about, isn't it? I would go as far as saying, its very possible that I am creating opportunities that another professional would never see or take the time to explore. The best part about it is that even if absolutely nothing else ever comes out of the Pro-Bono, a worthy cause is getting a great product that they otherwise would not have had to resources to acquire.

Someday I am going to write a book (and get paid for it, BTW) about the law of reciprocity and starting a successful business.


Jason
 
I do this Robin Hood thing from time to time, if there is a good project that needs some help.

Like in the moment, I help Faith Granger with her "Deuce of Spades" film and do some free 3D and compositing.

When I was younger I got my arse saved by some Robin Hoods several times - now it´s time to do my share and give to others what I received.

Regarding regular jobs, well the economy is going down the tubes, and we all have to face the fact that most of us will make much lesser money than the last years.

And I don´t mean only getting lesser jobs, but payd lesser for jobs.


Frank
 
Jason, I agree with you in part. But there needs to be caution used in giving it away. I think if approached as you are, insofar as creating opportunities that didnt previously exist, it can be used as a fair way to impart the evidence of the value of the end product to a market that didnt exist. Great if it works, and you can count on the down the line stuff coming.

As Grinner said, the times may require some haggling, but still I charge an equipment rental component in my rates, and that wont change. Think someone else mentioned it also, but Ive broken my rates down a little further, so theres me (and some other staff costs as required), camera and support equipment, lighting and grip, audio. I mean I paid good money for my Sanken audio gear, my wireless system cost me nearly $2500 USD without mic/s, why should I give that freely as someone who has a Rode mic and a Senn g2? Not saying thats not a decent set up, just falls in a different class.
 
Postmaster said:
I do this Robin Hood thing from time to time, if there is a good project that needs some help.

Like in the moment, I help Faith Granger with her "Deuce of Spades" film and do some free 3D and compositing.

When I was younger I got my arse saved by some Robin Hoods several times - now it´s time to do my share and give to others what I received.
Click to expand...

I think thats a good attitude Frank. Forgetting rates for a moment, still good to be charitable at times to those in need.
 
AwakenedFilms said:
Someday I am going to write a book (and get paid for it, BTW) about the law of reciprocity and starting a successful business.


Jason
Click to expand...


Hey, hey... by that law, I should become a millionaire in my remaining years. I've given and given and given of my services countless times. I've provided video and sound coverage for countless non-profit events. In the past 7 years, I can say I've netted one paid wedding shoot as a result of all that giving.

:huh:
 
I think that Frank has the perfect outlook on all of this. He is giving of his time and resources for a filmmaker and project that obviously shows talent and promise. I think the problem with a lot of pros are that we constantly get approached to work on freebie projects that rarely have any chance of success and rarely have much real talent behind them. There is a huge difference between drive and perseverance and real talent.

Drive and perserverance often go hand in hand with talent but in LA, I constantly cross paths with individuals or groups who have a lot of drive and perserverance, but little talent and want me to give of my expensive time for free or deferred pay, which as we all know is code for "politely not paying you". Those are the people that it is usually easy to turn down, but it is sometimes tough to tell them that all of their machinations will probably lead to nothing.

It's nice that we have all been able to see the process as someone like Faith makes her dream come true and anyone can see that she has a unique take on a cool original subject. Those are the kinds of people who often can get a pretty good helping hand, because they are really talented and their projects show promise of being artistically and possibly commericially successful.

Dan
 
I hope I didn't come across as pompous. I know what its like to spend big money on equipment and training only to be low balled or undercut by naive clients. I also can't stand the CraigsList "Huge company offering great exposure plus meals, copy and credit" thing. Over in the NYC crew CL pages a number of working professionals have begun to respond negatively to those ads (some responses are quite funny). Its one thing to be a student filmmaker or indi-pro looking to colloborate on a shoe-string. Its a whole other thing to try to get everything for nothing.

I also know what is working for me and part of the plan is deliberate Pro-Bono work.

Mark, I hope you see even more of a return on your generosity, though I would imagine that is not why you did the work in the first place.


Jason
 
This is a thorny issue and I can see both sides of the argument.

Large companies are using freebies as a way to cut costs, it's essentially slave labour and is morally indefensible. Wages are one of the few variable, non-fixed costs in making films and that's what they are targetting. Some people are saying that it's becoming almost impossible to make a living in TV/ Film Production in the UK.

I don't know what the situation is in the US.

There is a group called sweat I think, who target companies that don't offer wages, as it's against the National Minimum Wage laws.

They believe that people should film to their budgets. If you have only £800, you should make an £800 film and not expect to be able to make a £25,000 film by getting people to work for nothing.

Although I do think they have a point, with the way the film industry works, I don't feel I can do that. Studios, festivals, distributors don't give you bonus points for making a film at it's proper level. The film that has a higher production value is going to get the deal, going to play in the festival and will act as a better calling card for getting a bigger project made.

That's the way it is.

It is a problem. A lot of the people that make it into the Industry have come through this system where they are used to getting things for nothing. They no longer expect to pay for services. In the UK I've heard it said that it's resulting in a lot of the best talent leaving the industry for good. It makes sense, a 30 year old, talented, intelligent guy makes the decision to pack it in and move into a field where you actually get paid your worth.

Trouble is, I can't see a way out of it. As a low budget filmmaker, I either make a higher quality, more ambitious film that has more chance of getting success or I play fair and have to make a much smaller film. There is no way I can get noticed doing the latter, no way.

One of the ironies is that I can probably get a better service for free than I can by paying at times. Let's say I want some editing done. I can pay a professional £250 a day to do the job or get a young, talented guy to do it for free. The pro who rightfully expects to be paid for his time will do a good job up till the point that the money runs out. If you pay a guy for two days of his time, you'll get a good job for two days and that's it. The free guy will do it till it's finished and you can go back and ask him to change it. All for nothing. It might take him two weeks, but it'll be done.

It's wrong, it's unsustainable but it's either take advantage of the situation where there are millions of wannabes around, but no jobs or give up and not make films.

In the UK, there is no film industry. You have to make it before you make it. Unless I can show that I can make a top quality film, no-one is going to give me money. The only way of doing that is to take advantage of the situation.

In my defence, i see my work as being genuinely valuable. I treat everyone well and try to make sure everything is constructive. I am also bringing money into the industry from the outside. It may not be much, but it's something at least.

However, I can see that the situation is potentially damaging. It can potentially drive prices down, which then results in the better individuals not being able to stay in the business, which then erodes the quality available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top