DVD-Software.info

[Larry J.]

Waiving the right to remain silent, "David McCall"
<david.mccall@comcast.net> said:

[quote]"Larry J." <usenet2@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96EC8213A7F34thefrogprince@68.6.19.6...
Waiving the right to remain silent, Seattle Eric
noone@erehwon.gov> said:

Larry J. wrote:
Well, many producers sill swear by the tried and true, $1,000
per finished minute, as a general rule.

Many producers don't think very well. I'd say $1,000+/minute,
UP TO FIFTEEN MINUTES. After that, it starts dropping off.

True. Also, graphics-laden videos should cost less.

Sure $1000 a minute sounds about right.
That's what we were using as a starting point in 1967 :-)

What century are we in?
[/quote]
The one where everyone with a $1,000 camera and a pirated copy of
Premiere is a "Video Producer." ;-)

--
Larry Jandro
Video Engineering & Equipment Rentals
Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
[Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to reply]

[David McCall]

"Larry J." <usenet2@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96EC89164E333thefrogprince@68.6.19.6...
[quote]Waiving the right to remain silent, "David McCall"
david.mccall@comcast.net> said:

"Larry J." <usenet2@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96EC8213A7F34thefrogprince@68.6.19.6...
Waiving the right to remain silent, Seattle Eric
noone@erehwon.gov> said:

Larry J. wrote:
Well, many producers sill swear by the tried and true, $1,000
per finished minute, as a general rule.

Many producers don't think very well. I'd say $1,000+/minute,
UP TO FIFTEEN MINUTES. After that, it starts dropping off.

True. Also, graphics-laden videos should cost less.

Sure $1000 a minute sounds about right.
That's what we were using as a starting point in 1967 :-)

What century are we in?

The one where everyone with a $1,000 camera and a pirated copy of
Premiere is a "Video Producer." ;-)

Bingo[/quote]

Of course in 1967 we were using 16mm film, not ~1/8" tape.

David

[Steve King]

"Seattle Eric" <noone@erehwon.gov> wrote in message
news:434bf4e2$0$4862$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net...
[quote]Larry J. wrote:
Well, many producers sill swear by the tried and true, $1,000 per
finished minute, as a general rule.

Many producers don't think very well. I'd say $1,000+/minute, UP TO
FIFTEEN MINUTES. After that, it starts dropping off.

[/quote]
When you say the above, you must have a general type of video in mind. As
Larry said, graphics laden videos might cost less than the ROT (Rule Of
Thumb;-). On the other hand, I am starting production of an approximately
15 minute video that has a day of aerials. There are 6 locations. Three of
those locations are for interviews. The interviewees locations and
availabilities are such that I cannot do more than one in a day. One of the
interviews will require travel and overnight accomodations. My client wants
high production values, which means pretty lighting and at least two days
with a dolly and one with a camera crane that can get the camera up 16 feet.
This project will bill out at considerably more than $1k per minute. As an
example of a video that comes under the ROT, last week I shot some footage
of a client demoing some test equipment. Each test was shot as a single
camera shot. It took about two hours. I put the project together today in
about four hours. Maybe a total of 10 minutes of video for a web site.
That will fall considerably under $1k per minute. In short, I still think
RsOT aren't worth much unless one's work is all pretty much the same. I
hope mine stays sufficiently diverse that I have to pull out the spread
sheet each time to stay solvent.

Steve King

[Steve King]

"Seattle Eric" <noone@erehwon.gov> wrote in message
news:434bf56c$0$4862$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net...
[quote]Steve King wrote:

What sort of job did you have in mind that could be done for $50 per
minute?


Heh. I dunno what the OP was talking about, but obviously there's a
threshold cost: $1K+ just to leave the office.
[/quote]
You've got that right. Thinking about the 'threshold factor' has reminded
me that in every video job I win, I have to build in enough profit to cover
the time I spend with clients and potential clients discussing programs that
never happen and working up bids for projects that either I lose or that
change character so much that three or four budgets have to get prepared
before things are finalized. There are lots of claims on the 'gross
profits' of each job before anything gets to my pocket.

Steve King

[Seattle Eric]

Larry J. wrote:

[quote]Waiving the right to remain silent, Seattle Eric
noone@erehwon.gov> said:
Larry J. wrote:

Well, many producers sill swear by the tried and true, $1,000
per finished minute, as a general rule.

Many producers don't think very well. I'd say $1,000+/minute,
UP TO FIFTEEN MINUTES. After that, it starts dropping off.


True. Also, graphics-laden videos should cost less.

Heh. I note that I started working w/a very experienced company, good[/quote]
shooter, good editor, but their graphics sucked ass. They hadn't
bothered to learn the gear they had. Using their same stuff, my
graphics were a lot tastier.

Leaving the shop imposes hard costs that must be recovered. OTOH,
actual graphics skill is just as important as shooting skilz.

[Seattle Eric]

Steve King wrote:

[quote]"Seattle Eric" <noone@erehwon.gov> wrote in message
news:434bf4e2$0$4862$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net...

Larry J. wrote:

Well, many producers sill swear by the tried and true, $1,000 per
finished minute, as a general rule.

Many producers don't think very well. I'd say $1,000+/minute, UP TO
FIFTEEN MINUTES. After that, it starts dropping off.



When you say the above, you must have a general type of video in mind.<ETC
[/quote]
Absolutely. We can all point to commercials that cost a quarter mil for
20 seconds. Really, WE know the ROT is fairly pointless.

[quote]My client wants
high production values, which means pretty lighting and at least two days
with a dolly and one with a camera crane that can get the camera up 16 feet.
[/quote]
Sweet.

[quote]This project will bill out at considerably more than $1k per minute. As an
example of a video that comes under the ROT, last week I shot some footage
of a client demoing some test equipment. Each test was shot as a single
camera shot. It took about two hours. I put the project together today in
about four hours. Maybe a total of 10 minutes of video for a web site.
That will fall considerably under $1k per minute. In short, I still think
RsOT aren't worth much unless one's work is all pretty much the same. I
hope mine stays sufficiently diverse that I have to pull out the spread
sheet each time to stay solvent.
Steve King
[/quote]
I dunno: I'd be wishing for more of the aerial and crane shot stuff myself.

What part of the country are you in?

[quote]
[/quote]

[nobody special]

Depends too on what you mean by "graphics". I have clients that use
that as a catch-all term for anything between imported bitmaps from an
existing Powerpoint, to simple lower thirds, tovirtual sets, to 3-D
animation in Maya/Alias with inverse kinematics, lip synched dialog,
HDRI and volumetric renders of photoreal humans and myriads of
background objects all dancing like a Busby Berkeley routine.

I have had clients show me a 15-second car-accident reenactment
animation, they told me their best graphics guy spent a month on it,
and it was "very expensive". He'd imported a pre-built model of the car
from Turbosquid, not changed the color to match the real car, and it
was a hard top instead of a convertible as the real car was. He never
added any detail to the underside of the car geometry, so when it
flipped over, the bottom looked like a HotWheels toy. He had
composited the car into a road scene from the actual location, shot on
video, that was nice effort, but the scale was off, so the animated car
was about the relative size of a go-kart, and the composite was a
simple z-move to 'shrink' the car into the distance without true
scaling or perspective change, it's wheels merely skated across the
road while turning at the wrong speed... Finally, he had no real-world
physics engine or forward kinematics to define the car's trajectory, so
he just keyframed a few positions, and didn't even tweak the paths. So
the car stops in mid-flight, changes paths almost 90 degress, and
Accellerates into the new path as it rolls into a farm field, before
coming to a sudden stop. It's path was at least as convoluted as the
Warren Commission's "Magic Bullet". This apparently was supposed to be
submitted in a court of law. I know high school interns using Blender
that could do better. Client was SO proud of it. I didn't have the
heart to tell them.
What would you bill THAT job at?

Graphics should be cheaper... but often aren't. I think Steve hits it
right: a fixed rule of thumb number is only good for doing the same
exact job every day. Thank God that's not my world.

[Bill Fright]

Steve Guidry wrote:
[quote]In my experience, the $1k per minute figure falls apart as projects get
longer. That's because it usually takes comparatively less additional
resources to produce the longer videos. Here's what I mean : The camera is
there already. So what if you shoot for 3 hours or 6 hours. You're billing
for a full day anyway. In the edit process, much of your work is in
defining the piece's overall look and feel - - getting the show's graphic
elements' "style" just right. Going through all the approvals for that . .
. When it's done, it's comparatively little additional work to just create
a few more lower thirds, or even full pages.

On this project, I'd try to make a careful evaluation of the actors'
abilities to carry the piece for 30 minutes of talking. Unless they're
professionals - - that is to say if they are folks from inside the company
who have been tapped to be the talent - - I'd build in 2X or more cushion to
give them time to get it right. Be aware that often there are internal
political reasons for choosing the talent, and you can't just fire them.

Also, be sure to ask if the approval process has changed since last time;
Ask "Who has to approve the final project ?" If there are 2 or 3 additional
people who didn't have to sign off on the last one, then add 25% or so,
because each of them likely has their own agenda about what the video should
contain and look like. Especially be wary of "higher-ups" who want
approval but somehow can't make time for the planning process. I usually
add 50% for those folks, and it's not enough. They're the ones who will
have you starting over from scratch.
[/quote]
I go through this approval process a lot. Adding %25 is a sane figure. I
add about more than that normally. It seems in today's work place the
approvers have a mandate to create change if it's necessary or not. They
simply have to change something to justify their approval status.
Sometimes it's an easy change but often it can be a specific reshoot.
Sure it's far less a headache than the linear days but still you have to
bill for it.


[quote]
Finally, if you at all can do so, insist on a graduated payment plan : 25%
of the initial estimate upon script completion/approval; 50% upon completion
of the shooting, and the balance upon completion of the edit. There's
something about having already paid for it that makes a customer more
flexible in their demands for changes. And the converse is true as well :
It's a lot easier to tell them "OK, these changes are do-able, but it's
going to cost you $XXX more . . ." when you only have the last 25% riding
on their answer. Deal with them from a position of strength. If you think
they won't go for a graduated payment plan, try this approach : "You know
John, that previous project was small enough for me to finance it for you,
but this one will take a lot more time and resources on my part. The
pay-as-we-go approach allows me to give your project the focus and internal
priority it deserves instead of having to chase other projects to pay the
bills for the next 2 months while we're working on it." You'll probably be
surprised how well they will understand this.
[/quote]
Well put!

[quote]
More later if the interest warrants . . .

[/quote]

[Steve King]

"Seattle Eric" <noone@erehwon.gov> wrote in message
news:434c7c23$0$4864$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net...
SNIP
[quote]
I dunno: I'd be wishing for more of the aerial and crane shot stuff
myself.

What part of the country are you in?

Chicago.[/quote]

Steve King