Cinematic 'Short Story' VS Documentary

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by grinner on August 28, 2011 at 10:41am

1. You'll wanna keep the entire ceremony but edit around any flaws and greatly summerize the rest of the event.

2. see above.

3. Some do. Most just want a documentation of the day though. Give em what they buy.

4. hell no. A 1600 dollar package is a one camera one operator and a quickie edit. If they have five figures you can crew it and live switch it.

5. Many love same day edits and they don't mind paying for it. Lots of em love a little wrap up montage projected at the reception. That means you need someone editing while you are still shooting.

 

Not sure what you are getting at with the whole DSLR thing. Yes, they look better for obvious reasons but you'll not edit footage from em any differently. In your case, maybe a layer or two less finess but you'll always color grade per shot no matter what kind of footage it is. I don't wannamake light of the wedding videography industry but most brides and mothers of the bride are not looking at lighting, depth of field, or even composition of a shot. They are looking at Mary's dress and talking about Uncle Bert caughing too much. You can spend all dang day making a shaky DV shot look great and your feedback my be "why does my daughter look so heavy?"

 

cuz I was spendning time making the shot look awesome, not governing your daughter's nacho habbit for the last two years. lol

 

There is indeed a place for high end wedding day documentaries. Stick your chest out and charge what they are worth. You'll find many a rich mom will happily pay five figures, not because they productin value is awesome, but so she can tell her friends at the country club how much she paid. Neiman Marcus syndrome. That said, you'll need a reel to sell these and old DV stuff won't do that. Snag up a 5D, invest time in the next low budget one then use that as your demo to start multiplying what you are currently charging. The truth is, when you charge less than the still photog who will work a literal fraction of the time that you do, man, nobody truly expects that much. Don't become known as the cheapest in town. Become known as the best.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dreams Creation Video Production on August 30, 2011 at 3:50pm

You are right on so many levels. I guess we try to be creative just so we can see our own work. There are many things that sometimes I need to point out to them. But thank you for taking your time and answering our questions, you hit the nail on the head for most of it and thank you for that. I especially love the nacho comment,lol 

grinner said:

1. You'll wanna keep the entire ceremony but edit around any flaws and greatly summerize the rest of the event.

2. see above.

3. Some do. Most just want a documentation of the day though. Give em what they buy.

4. hell no. A 1600 dollar package is a one camera one operator and a quickie edit. If they have five figures you can crew it and live switch it.

5. Many love same day edits and they don't mind paying for it. Lots of em love a little wrap up montage projected at the reception. That means you need someone editing while you are still shooting.

 

Not sure what you are getting at with the whole DSLR thing. Yes, they look better for obvious reasons but you'll not edit footage from em any differently. In your case, maybe a layer or two less finess but you'll always color grade per shot no matter what kind of footage it is. I don't wannamake light of the wedding videography industry but most brides and mothers of the bride are not looking at lighting, depth of field, or even composition of a shot. They are looking at Mary's dress and talking about Uncle Bert caughing too much. You can spend all dang day making a shaky DV shot look great and your feedback my be "why does my daughter look so heavy?"

 

cuz I was spendning time making the shot look awesome, not governing your daughter's nacho habbit for the last two years. lol

 

There is indeed a place for high end wedding day documentaries. Stick your chest out and charge what they are worth. You'll find many a rich mom will happily pay five figures, not because they productin value is awesome, but so she can tell her friends at the country club how much she paid. Neiman Marcus syndrome. That said, you'll need a reel to sell these and old DV stuff won't do that. Snag up a 5D, invest time in the next low budget one then use that as your demo to start multiplying what you are currently charging. The truth is, when you charge less than the still photog who will work a literal fraction of the time that you do, man, nobody truly expects that much. Don't become known as the cheapest in town. Become known as the best.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom on March 6, 2012 at 12:38am

"Not sure what you are getting at with the whole DSLR thing. Yes, they look better for obvious reasons but you'll not edit footage from em any differently."

A shoulder rig DSLR, with a 50mm f/1,8 produces more garbage footage than a regular camcorder. From an editing perspective, while you can leave the camcorder footage uncut, and it will roll a nice shot, the DSLR footage has to be cut, and very precisely. With that creative control comes a huge variation, and a large risk. Whereas you can drop in 40 minutes of camcorder footage, grade it and leave it, DSLR footage needs to be broken down into shots.

You're also not going to get the shot you want at any given point in time. A good operator might, but never always. It was a huge deal in 'The Untouchables' that they had a 135 second long glidecam shot. It took over a week of filming to get it right. As run-and-gunners, we don't have that luxury, so we try to mitigate risk however possible. There's a real business risk if your footage requires stabilization afterwards. That needs to be factored in, and billed for. That's why we see companies who go out with five shooters. They're spreading the risk...

If you're going full DSLR, and planning to make a cinematic, 5 minute cut of the ceremony, that's great. Setting out to create a one hour ceremony video, from a one hour ceremony, from DSLR alone is vastly more complex than with a camcorder.

Back to the question, is it profitable to create such a long video from DSLR? I'm tending towards no, unless your business plan covers the risks by hiring several shooters, or manages risk by using a camcorder/DSLR combo

A five-dslr shoot will tend to look just like a camcorder shoot, because many shots do not play to the strength of the DSLR: depth of field control. Working with tens of thousands of dollars in lenses, the shot may still call for a look that a camcorder can produce equally well. 

A condensed version of the day will tend to favour those awesome DSLR shots, and sometimes it does so at the expense of the storyline, and pacing. 

Are people happy with a highly condensed version of the day? They're buying it from our competition. They know they're not buying a documentary, and the product is a 5 minute video. These same people are then adding a documentary option, on top of an already steep buy-in ($2400 for a five minute video) Let's say that  speeches, from a camcorder, cost an extra $1000, and that all the editors have to do is grade one clip, and cut out the pauses...and it takes 3 hours to edit...then that's a very profitable addition. 

The cinematic, short story seems to be the answer to the low-budget couple. Sacrifices have to be made somewhere: fewer cameramen, less editing, a shorter product etc, all driven by a market trend of more people with low budgets looking for film work. Combine that with a fairly saturated market, and you can still carve a niche out, but you have to be smart, and not offer the clients the moon ie: A DSLR/multi-cameraman/Cecile B. Demile extravaganza. Establish the cost of your service, and create products that serve both poor and rich clients. There is no haggling...a $1600 wedding doesn't get three shooters. Charge $500 for revisions if you don't like them. State that in the contract clearly. When a $20k wedding client asks for the same flavour of minor revision, then charge them $500 too. 

Managing the product, and marketing what is possible, the couples will categorize themselves, as opposed to tailoring the service to each client. 100% of sales is in educating the clients on what services are available, and why they are good products that are worth having. In a high-end market, or pre-supposing a great reputation, then the negotiations can go on longer, or be more nuanced, because that is what those clients expect. 

The broader market seems to want video coverage based on market prices alone. We can't, or won't compete with the $300 Kijiji specials... so whether the product is a five minute artistic film, or a completely raw hour from a static angle, it basically comes down to us to tailor our offerings according to what we like to produce, what we can make at a profit, what will generate the most sales(given a limited number of weekends in the summer), market saturation in a given locale, average budget of a couple, average price in the area, willingness to travel, international marketability, and reputation and so on.

The product should reflect what the company does best, at a profit. If the product significantly misses the market, in either price, or profitability, then the company won't be in business long. 

Grinner mentions that a $1600 shoot is a one-man shoot, and a one day edit. I like that kind of thinking.. Your product isn't changed for each client, so you have the maximum leverage, and consistency for all clients. Anything extra, like a second filmer, can be provided, but it has a logical value. Scalability would be key, when you're going for the top-tier customers. If one shooter is worth $800, then five shooters are worth $4000. Editing one shooter's footage is worth $800, so editing five shooter's footage is worth $4000. Throw in a switcher rental, an operator, and a couple helpers to set up and tear down, and you've got an easily justifiable $10k. Show any kind of inconsistency and that is an invitation to be taken advantage of.

Hey, if the client wants to spend $10k, then it's my job to figure out how to deliver $10k in value, even if I only know how to deliver less. In art, the art is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it. It seems that penny-pinching and hand-holding leads to lowered profits, and lack of trust.

A normal client will never stop you from lowering your prices, if price is ever any consideration, and it always is. There's a fine line between giving a client a good deal, and cutting yourself off at the knees, by not paying yourself enough to deliver quality. After all, it's a relationship. Just because you quoted one price for the first service, does not mean that all future amendments and additions to that service are free. $1000 a day puts a realistic time-limit in the clients mind, and forces them to think clearly about what they expect to get from you, on that day. If the day ends, and they didn't get what they wanted, they can always hire you another day...at $1000. 

Keep running into this statement: for the big businesses, they'll look at a competitive quote that is done by the hours, and think that quality is lessened somewhere. Grinner, you said elsewhere that you make better money charging $1000/day, than you did charging $200/hour. That's a very interesting statement...If you're able to deliver $1000 value in three hours, then the client is happy, and your're happy.

At $200/hour, the client may spend more time worrying about efficiency, and micro-managing the scope of the work because of that unreasonably high number, that they'll cause you any number of headaches, and losses along the way. 

ex: 2 hours one day, client thinks up a new item to be filmed, so you film one hour the next day...

I work in construction also, and I find that anytime I bill by the hour, it is aggravating with my best clients, and a disaster with a good client. The most successful people I know, are the ones who are able to package their services at a premium rate, instead of solely letting the scope of the work dictate their rate. The scope will always change. Every client is different, with different expectations, and will put different demands on your time. Sometimes you'll work for $100/hour, sometimes you'll make a lot less...It comes down to this: if I charge for productive time only, then I'll be bankrupt in no time. There is a possibly infinite amount of ideation, and other activities unrelated to the actual production work, that needs to be factored in to billing, and charged for. A client that is getting free advice, and conceptualization, will place no limits on the extent of their inquiry.

We've had clients who expect unlimited edits of their wedding video, at no extra cost, because there was no framework, or limiting factors outlined, both in the billing structure, and the contract. If it's not in either, then it must be a free service.... Worst case scenario, is you flat out refuse a customer. This is bad customer service. When the client wants something, then there's the possibility of a sale. It's up to you to inform them of the value, or suggest products that they may be interested in.  

The alternative is to do the work, and hate doing it, because it's free. There's the odd client where you've made enough money on the original contract, that a slight amount of additional work is mutually agreeable. Ideally, this extra work is billed. There are also a larger number of poorer people, always. It is necessary to have a consistent way of dealing with all clients, in all situations, that if done correctly will maximize your profit from the larger contracts, and minimize your losses on the smaller ones.

If the company doesn't have a clear policy, then the absolute worst case scenario is the client who demands the extra work, and doesn't have any intention of paying for it, because they've been a penny pincher from the start.

TLDR: Don't change your billing practices with each client..establish the value of your work, and stick to it. Build your reputation, and your reel, and start building your network to where it supports you.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion