FAST-CHEAP-GOOD
[vimeo video_id=”13762496″ width=”400″ height=”300″ title=”Yes” byline=”Yes” portrait=”Yes” autoplay=”No” loop=”No” color=”00adef”]
I received the above video in my inbox the other day and on the whole I was very impressed with it. Obviously, the filmmaker, Dan Blank, is extremely talented and well versed in both production and post-production. His video is well conceived and executed – and the effects work is really nice to boot! You can see how everything came together for Dan in his extremely well put together making of video below. For those of you who have never seen how plates are shot or how green screen is composited, Dan’s video is extremely enlightening.
[vimeo video_id=”13774835″ width=”400″ height=”300″ title=”Yes” byline=”Yes” portrait=”Yes” autoplay=”No” loop=”No” color=”00adef”]
However, one thing that really caught my attention was how Dan told me that he produced this entire video for around $2,000.00. And I don’t doubt that he did – Dan pointed out that he spent countless of his own hours and was fortunate enough to have much of his crew volunteer their time. Not to mention – as evidenced in the above video – he was smart about the way he executed things and gave everything some definite forethought.
So while it’s not my intention to make an example out of Dan – he did a killer job – I must use this opportunity to raise my concerns over something that I have noticed in this industry (and to be very fair – something that I myself have been guilty of myself in the past! See below… also pls note I asked Dan if it was OK to use him as an example in this discussion and he was gracious enough to oblige.)
As a filmmaker its enticing to talk about the low costs you had that yielded a knock-out video. After all, planning and executing a piece of outstanding visual media is HARD and can be EXPENSIVE – especially when everyone is getting paid their standard rates – and I mean EVERYONE on the crew, cast, post etc. So when you produce something that looks like a sparkling piece of Hollywood glitter for about 1/1000th of the price, its easy to say – hey look what I accomplished for only X dollars. It’s important for me to say that I don’t want to come off as a a hypocrite. I’ve been guilty of this too in the past – I did it with Reverie way back in 2008. I wouldn’t have been able to produce that with no planning over one weekend if I hadn’t pulled a few key favors – and if my crew hadn’t been comprised of good friends/colleagues. Most importantly – I wasn’t shy about saying that shooting “Reverie” – “only”- cost me $5,000. ($2,000 for the helicopter, $1,000 for each model, and $1,000 for the editor…)
I guess that I’m suggesting that we as filmmakers be more responsible about this in general – myself included – because I hear these claims more and more often these days as the cost of technology drops. And perhaps my main point is: I’m not concerned with what we say to one another – but what we communicate to producers / clients out there when we make these claims. When they hear of these low numbers – they come to expect us to do the same for them… and the fact the we produced these things “on our own” and “with friends” all too often gets lost.
As we all know, shooting films/commercials/shorts/viral videos with a paid crew, with the correct permits, security, location releases, and cast is entirely different than doing the same exact film while pulling those favors in (and can be done at a fraction of the price of course…) If you are able to pull it off with stunning results – you deserve to be compensated for your talents and efforts – and so does everyone working with you when you do it for a client.
Dan Blank has proven with the above videos that he is a talented filmmaker. But to say that he made that video for $2,000.00 is to undersell himself. IMHO – that $2,000.00 should barely cover his fee. Likewise, there are hundreds of filmmakers out there who can do inspiring things with a camera and are getting paid little to nothing for their talent – all because we have the weakness of spouting off about what we can achieve for less. Moreover, these budget myths that we create only encourage producers to try and squeeze more out of every dollar. When they hear that I shot “Reverie” for $5,000 on my own w/ friends – they have a harder time understanding why the exact same production will cost significantly more when everyone involved is paid – from the cops, to the PAs, the locations permits/clearances …. all the way to the rental house (not to mention the proper insurance for hanging your talent out the side of a helicopter!)…
Instead we should make producer’s privy to this little rule that I swear by:
There are three attributes every producer wants out of a production…
FAST-CHEAP-GOOD
…but at any one time you can only have two in my opinion. So if a Producer wants a production to be FAST and CHEAP – it probably ain’t gonna be GOOD. Of course we all strive to make GOOD content – and so if we have a smaller budget, we likely will need more time to pull it off well. If we have to do it fast – we likely will have to through more resources at it – and of course money. I always spend more money on big productions to make sure I have backups in case something unpredictable happens – i.e. lights and 12X12s or even 20X20s in case a storm rolls in…
In Dan’s case — he made something GOOD for CHEAP. But I can imagine the countless hours he spent editing and working on the visual effects – so needless to say – it wasn’t FAST. Most commercials wants things FAST and GOOD – because their time and the talent’s time is very valuable (and so is yours!) which is why commercials are historically relatively expensive to pull off.
Closing comments: Value yourselves as filmmakers. Don’t sell yourself short. Your skills are in high demand, and they are worthy of appropriate compensation. (Special Thanks to Dan Blank for letting me make an example of him!)
And now I leave you with this – so we can end on a lighter note…
Great post – and it’s oh so true. I’m at the beginning phase of filmmaking as well, and am very familiar with the “Look, I can do it for X,” but from a business stand point it’s just not good practice. What other business out there actually tells their customers their bare costs, including all their personal time put into it??
It doesn’t make sense to, except to try and boost your ego at the cost of selling yourself (very) short.
I like the FAST-GOOD-CHEAP saying you had too. Simple and memorable.
An extremely important point, directly but sensitively made, that can apply to many areas of creative endeavor. The tech we have allows us to do more for less but that means we have more skills than we used to have and the financial recompense should reflect that.
Great work Dan.
Pretty profound, and I have to point out that Vince is probably the only person in a position to say all this with any credibility. It’s nice to have someone who basically started out at the beginning of DSLR video, and who now can be an advocate for the profession.
Yup. What we do is always work out a production budget to say what it would have cost if we hired someone ELSE to produce it. Our documentary film which, you can “taste” here – http://www.jtography.com/jtography/ChrisDennis.html – is “costing” usd 200k. Most of that is my crew’s blood sweat and tears but at least having budgeted it properly we can quickly tell anyone what those tears are WORTH. We do it because Chris is talented and due to his socio-economic roots would never got a surf-sponsor’s attention otherwise.
The reverse, to say that we “did it for a dollar”… well, who are you talking to when you make a statement like that? The film community? We already know the value of personal hard work. Others? What’s the point?!
when it comes to cash and flow the routine is critical
indinero is a new start-up..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9ZjPqDSZh0
I believe the fast-cheap-good concept goes with other aspects of life as well.
story:
Part of my backyard fence fell down and I decided to re-do it with help of friends only. Pulling out 4 rotted concrete posts took the better part of a day. After which I was so exhausted that I ended up spending another day having to pour the post concrete. I tried to do this fast-cheap but this backfired when all the fence parts weren’t plumb. I ended up having to make several more trips to the hardware store to make it “good” and that took a better part of the week working on it a little at a time. In the end the fence looks good and cost cheap. But not fast. If I wanted it fast, I should have hired people who knew what they were doing. I could have also done fast, but it would not be good (and my initial trying to do it fast may have cost a year or two of the fence’s life).
You’re so correct about the exploitation of time in relation to a film’s dollar amount. Thank you Vincent for posting this and keep up the great work!
Vincent,
Perhaps by posting some real-life examples of bids, contracts, and jobs you’ve achieved (with the identifying information blacked out, if necessary) – would help us to see what a real life example looks like in terms of the things you covered (insurance for the talent hanging out of the helicopter, for example).
This recent post over at A Photo Editor is a great example of what I’m talking about:
http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2010/09/22/real-world-estimates-regional-hospital-ad-campaigns/
With the rapid influx of technology, and widespread learning on the internet, the mentorship aspect of our craft is lacking. This is where people used to learn how to put together a bid, appropriate pricing, things not to forget, etc…
I hope you’ll consider this.
Thanks for all you do.
Amen. Can’t tell you how many times we’ve had the “good, fast, cheap..pick two” conversation in recent years. Brutal trend.
This is something I’ve been battling my entire career! In fact I’ve heard the “FAST – GOOD – CHEAP” breakdown before, and used it to push back on unreasonable requests.
I could rattle off a hundred different examples of this but I’m sure anyone who’s ever worked for a producer could too. Thank you so much for posting this somewhere it will be read, and thank you for giving me something I can send to the penny pinchers in my office with a polite little “suck it” at the end of it.
cheers!
This is a good point, Vincent. I think we always subtract the hours we put into our work and it probably bites us in the rear, in the end ( pun intended ). I think this post reminds me that even if I do film work for myself or friends, I need to count the hours I do for filming, editing, etc. so that I always know the true value of a project so that when I grow into a business I have a better understanding of the real cost of a project as well as knowing how to budget for hiring others to do the work ( if I get so lucky 😉 ).
Great post
Mel
I think it’s interesting that FAST, CHEAP, AND GOOD live the same relationship as ISO, SHUTTER SPEED, AND APERTURE.
You can dog Dan, but he made a great video AND a great making-of video. It got noticed by you and posted on your blog. Why? Because of the amazing $2,000 price tag. He got attention, and I bet now he gets a lot more paid work – it got him through the door, just like Reverie got you through a door. I doubt your blog post will quell the race for the bottom, but it doesn’t matter. What matters is to make something amazing. If you keep doing that, I don’t see a need to worry.
Vincent Laforet Reply:
October 1st, 2010 at 3:27 pm
@Chris, Chris – read the piece carefully before you speak. I’m not at all dogging Chris and am in fact stating that I did the very same thing myself with Reverie in the past… in fact we asked Dan if it was cool to use him as an example to bring this issue into discussion. Quality will always get work – setting false economic expectations will help no one. Not you, not Dan, not me – not anyone. Basically we’re all on the same page (I think) just make a better effort at actually reading the piece and the 3 disclaimers in it before posting…
Chris Reply:
October 2nd, 2010 at 2:45 pm
@Vincent Laforet, Sorry if I offended, Vincent. Agreed, false expectations help no one, but my point is that low-ball wonder sometimes works: El Mariachi, Clerks, District 9, etc. Sometimes it’s a viable option to disclose a budget if doing so makes a great story.
Yes, subsequently convincing producers you are worth your rate can be a battle, but successful producers know their asses depends on good a cinematographer, and they hire the person who has a great attitude, is fun to be around for days at a time, can be trusted when it hits the fan, AND is an awesome cinematographer. Selling the first three attributes keeps you working. How you initially get through the door is irrelevant.
Colin Sander Reply:
October 6th, 2010 at 10:11 am
@Chris, & Vincent
I’m going to have to agree with Chris on this one… Sometimes as a filmmaker just starting out, having the opportunity to create something from a lead position, becomes more valuable than the 2,000 dollars you earned.
Once you have a product of value on your reel, or in your past, then people see worth, and will pay for that.
However, Vincent, after looking at Dan’s website, his credentials, history, education… etc… He should be above and beyond doing that kind of work for that price. If he isn’t or hasn’t figured out how to manage his business life in order to be able to do so, that is another skill that might be lacking, outside of this filmmakers toolbox.
-Colin
“…I have to point out that Vince is probably the only person in a position to say all this with any credibility….”
Really?! This is no dig on Vince but I don’t think that statement is rings true. Any one who has freelanced, been out their working in a creative field, dealing with clients, and gained experience over the years can relate and say the same thing that Vince is. With as just as much credibility, too.
The project above reminds me of this story from Cinema5D: http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=4301 . In that case the budget was 75% less, only $500. As if that’s a selling point. When I read that and the description of all of the time involved I was shaking my head. On a certain level I don’t get it.
A guy walks into a bar and says, “Bartender give me a drink. I have a budget of five cents.” Bartender says, “Get out of here.” A guy walks into a DP/Photographer’s office and says, “I need a video! I have a budget of $500.” The DP/Photographer says, “Great. Let’s do it. I’ll round up the troops; call in a co-director, a set designer, an assist. for the set designer, additional art directors, and… wait, don’t get up yet, we’ll give you the equivalent of seventy man hours over four days to do the video. Does that work? Can you live with that for your $500?…”
I understand doing personal work, personal projects. I do a lot of it myself. I also understand that there is a tipping point where the opportunity to do something unique, something that makes a killer portfolio piece, or killer reel, tips the project in favor of a reduced budget. But these budgets are beyond reduced.
I think it’s important to remember a couple of things.
1. If you hit the tipping point where the creative opportunity makes a reduced budget worth it then great. Go for it but when you send your finished piece out into the world don’t make the hook the budget. Let the piece stand on its own and live or die by its own merits.
Just as it is great to get a creative opportunity to do something new, it is also very easy to get pigeonholed by clients. When you shout from your blog, “Look at me. This should have cost $25k but I did it for $500,” you may become the go-to guy/gal for only the $500 projects.
2. Don’t forget that it is okay to say, “No.” It’s okay to turn down work or to flip it around and say, “look that budget is very low and you are only going to get X for that. To do it right, you really need X, Y, & Z, and the budget for that would be _____.”
The musician who wants something super creative for $500, the dance troupe which is also a tuition based school and a “pro-production company with pro-production fees” but has only $2000 to spend -> it’s okay for them to be turned down or to only get their respective $500 or $2000 worth of services. When they realize they need a better budget to do it right, they’ll be back.
Vincent Laforet Reply:
October 1st, 2010 at 3:29 pm
@Jon Roemer, I think you’re missing the point a bit – it’s not a question of whether or not to do things for yourself/ personal projects – or for how much at all. It’s about how we present it to the world and more importantly potential clients – that’s the thing I’m trying to highlight here.
Darryl Gregory Reply:
October 1st, 2010 at 11:34 pm
@Vincent Laforet, I have been working professionally as a DP for 2 decades, I don’t do “PERSONAL WORK/BEAUTY SHOTS” I am the real deal period, but with the HDSLR frenzy I’ve had to lower my rates due to the fact every kid who can afford a camera and gear thinks their a DP, for Christ sake get some talent before you offer rates that undermine the average day rate of a pro!
I’m tired of explaining to my clients why my rate is higher than the kid on craigslist, So this goes out to all of you who undermine the industry
with your low ball rates for DP work, JUST STOP! and remember you will not get respect for your talent, but abused and used for your cheapness, then as soon as your client realizes you have no talent… you will be fired, and find yourself re posting your $150 a day craigslist ad all over again.
Take my advise and do your first jobs for free, and learn from your mistakes, then when you think your ready…try and figure out what your worth
and use that as your guide for a daily rate.
God help us all now that quality cameras are affordable to the masses, and we all think we can shoot professionally for less.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the indepentant film maker, and the hobbyist shooting thos beauty shots, But I’ll be damned if they will force me to lower my rates.
Thanks, my rant is over, hit me with your best shots! 🙂
Henry Reply:
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:10 am
@Darryl Gregory,
I think you’ve missed the point of this post. But I see you needed to get something off your chest with this “rant” as you rightly put it.
If you value your work and it is better than “the kid on Craiglist” then why are you reducing your rates?
Those who you describe as “every kid who can afford a camera and gear thinks their [they’re] a DP” cannot undermine your work unless they are producing equal or better quality work than yourself. If they are producing equal or better work than you & are content charging less. This seems like basic economics & you may have to learn to accept that.
If you’ve been “a DP for 2 decades” & are “the real deal” as you profess yourself to be, then feel confident enough to decline proposed work from your clients that is below what you value work to be.
Now lets get back to the topic; FAST-CHEAP-GOOD.
Darryl Gregory Reply:
October 4th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
@Henry, Not to back my own truck up but…,
I meant to say “Over 2 decades” in the Movie Industry as I was a set carpenter prior to being a DP, as a DP I have just over 8 years, but this is besides the point, Now that I’m sober let me explain. 🙂
I get a lot of calls from people wanting me to shoot/DP for them, many of these calls are for shorts/acting reels/spec commercials etc, It is inevitable the will try and get me to lower my rate, I have no problems with negotiating my rates, but I find one question that will always come up during negotiations,
“Why is my rate higher than Joe Schmo on craigslist”
Then I spend more time explaining, and showing them my demo reel,
It is only then that they get it, like a light bulb just came on!
I’m just tired of competing with beginners for small jobs, the big jobs… I get all the time, it’s those little jobs that fill my schedule and puts some extra cash in my pocket, I like the little jobs as much as the big ones, But I’m not here to compete with craigslist posts period.
I hope this explains my rant, And I apologize to Vincent for doing it here.
Alexandra Fink Reply:
October 3rd, 2010 at 11:43 am
@Darryl Gregory, You are right about this. There are too many talented people and not enough work to go around. It’s been happening to photographers for a while now.
Jon Roemer Reply:
October 2nd, 2010 at 4:55 pm
@Vincent Laforet,
<>
Yes, I know, but that’s kind of like calling for responsibility on the back end, after the job is done. What about on the front end? That’s where “whether or not” and “for how much” are part of the equation and that’s just as important.
The responsibility you call for in the FAST-CHEAP-GOOD scenario also applies to the filmmaker knowing their CDB and the GR. Cost of Doing Business and the Going Rates (industry standards, etc.) Knowing your CDB and the GR sets up the parameters of a FAST-CHEAP-GOOD scenario you can give a client. It may also determine that you turn down a job or that the client severely reduce their expectations so that they are in line with their budget. I’m referring to commercial jobs here.
This is really no different than what I said above or what Dan says in his second post below.
Jon Roemer Reply:
October 2nd, 2010 at 4:56 pm
The brackets above were meant to contain a quote from your reply to me, “it’s not a question of whether or not to do things for yourself/ personal projects – or for how much at all. It’s about how we present it to the world and more importantly potential clients – that’s the thing I’m trying to highlight here.”
Yah if you were to do this for a client and they were using it as a commercial … it would easily be $20,000-30,000. I imagine Dan put weeks or maybe even a month into this. So, at this rate, if 1/3 of the total fee goes to him for his work/time — it would be $8,000-10,000 for that month. No one is going to get rich very quickly at that rate.
I agree with you Vince, this practice you are referring to makes it more difficult to charge sustainable rates to clients.
Producers and clients need to take note.
Anthony
Yeah…. I´m guilty to. I did stuff like that, and actually sometimes I´m still doing it.
But I think there are three different scenarios.
Two of them are O.K.
1. You give something away, just for the sake of it.
I did some friends of our reenactment group a favor and made a little film for them of the last display (Occupied Germany – first Summer 1945) they did – even a little drama which I shot in 90 minutes: http://exposureroom.com/members/FrankGlen/3b8e6acbb4594a73a78ef0b01761d59f/
Iit generated quite a stir and got me two real jobs.
2. You do a door opener like “Reverie” or “Lola” cause it generates a lot of attention on the web. Instead of sitting at home and waiting, that someone comes to your door, you do jobs like that for a obscene low price, but it may be a career booster.
3. You try to underbid all your competitors just to get that job.
If you get a job because you are good – thats fine. But if you only get it because you are $8000 cheaper than everyone else,thats bad for you and bad for all of us.
My ct2, Frank
I remember saying this exact same thing to my creative director at my first Internship — he looked at me as if I was nutts..and began to belittle this thought process..needless to say, I’m not with them..good thing too…Anyways, FAST-CHEAP-GOOD :: pick two!
Hi Vincent,
One other thing that’s easily forgotten is the experience and knowledge of the filmmaker.
Material costs may be less, but the amount of time and money invested by the filmaker to achieve this high level of skill and knowledge, is extremely valuable.
This should never be minimized, discounted or given away.
Sure, $2,000 may be the out-of-pocket cost, but factor in all the time and money invested in getting to that level…
it’s a $20,000 film. Easily.
Henry Reply:
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:57 am
@Ivan Boden,
I hear what you are saying, but I think you have it all wrong & you are off topic here.
Experience means nothing unless it brings value to your work. Either threw the final product, or somewhere through the process of the job itself.
Where you went to school, how many years you’ve been in the industry & however many hrs it took you to master fcp all mean nothing if we can’t see it in the quality of work you produce.
Experience can’t be an entry like goodwill on a balance sheet. Experience should be what makes you produce better work.
FAST-CHEAP-GOOD, pick two.
I don’t know about other people but when I’ve bit the bullet price wise in the past I’ve always asked the client that was getting one hell of a bargain to either not discuss the price with others when talking about the project or if they must to say what it should have cost. And when I’ve been asked what ___x____ cost I’ve always told them what it should have cost, not what it did.
I mean think about it logically people, if you saw a great video that was $2000 and you wanted the same thing why would you expect to pay more? You can’t blame clients or producers for expecting the same price when that’s literally what you charged and advertised by telling them just how cheap it was. Imagine you saw someone buy a great lens for $200 and when you went to buy that same lens it was $2000 because they only charged the other guy the low price to get your attention? You’d feel cheated. That what it looks like when you go “This only cost $1000! But for you $10,000!”
As somebody who’s been working in the industry for 11+ years doing stills and motion work on large features and smaller projects, that last video both made me laugh and cry. I’ve sadly been in that exact situation.
Nice work Dan. Great polish and excellent post.
Awesome video
Tiny budgets and high expectations is a classic situation we deal with daily in the ad world. Sometimes we have to turn down projects and sometimes we call in favors. Last week, I shot a project on a 7d because we didn’t have the money for someone else to do it. Business, whether it’s photography or widgets is all about relationships. Those relationships have value too and it’s often worth it to do a low ball job for someone who regularly butters your bread.
it’s simply a marketing tool to say it did only cost about XY Dollars. Remember the shortfilm on vimeo “Panic Attach” which was made with a Budget of 300$ ?
Common, we all know that if you count hours, days, weeks or even months of effort, it’s more like 30,000 or more…
What about the camera, batteries, greenscreen, PC/MAC and Software?
Did they all get it for free?
I know, some people might get software which is illegal, but cameras, gear and stuff?
The thing is, their “Budget” is the extra money for catering, the treadmill, duct tape etc
But a real budget includes much more than just the Pizzas they had for lunch!
As Dan said on vimeo “Shooting took a few weekends, post-production took a few months”
I’d do such a project too if I had the time to, cause I would get a lot of attention.
besides budget: simply great video
Am impressed how well the 7D performes with greenscreen.
It took propably weeks to plan all the complex shots and get the all the people and costumes
Watched it about 10 times now and simply love it
BUT: I’m sick of hearing about how much (or how less) money someone put in a video. If it’s good, you don’t need to say that it was cheap
hi guys
whatch this: http://www.movingimage.ch/produktion/Chantemoiselle_farbig.html
to be honest, not that well made like dan`s video. but – hey – I made it for free. just because it is my hobby. and the band would never have a chance to pay decent money for it.
as they are passionate for their music, do they deserve a decent video clip for free? I think this is part of the revolution of dslr filmmaking, not?
peace 🙂
and regards, roger
Hey everyone–
First off, a huge thanks to Vincent, Justin, and everyone who has watched the videos and gotten involved in this discussion. I didn’t hesitate when I was asked if I minded being part of this article. I agree with everything in Vincent’s post. And now, if that producer comes to me looking for a miracle on a tight budget, I can always link them over here.
However, I feel a little need to clarify a few things, not to defend myself, but to offer some more information to factor into the discussion. And why I feel somewhat proud in revealing the price tag.
About me: I went to NYU for film, studied animation, won a bunch of awards, got repped, and things never really took off. I spent years developing features and pitching at all the studios, where I’d run into the same problem over and over. Aside from a student film, I hadn’t made anything. Over and over, studios and production companies might try to buy my projects, but it became clear they’d never let me direct them. And rightfully so! I had no live-action experience, and I was pitching projects that would cost a huge amount in their eyes.
That’s when I decided I’d have to start making stuff on my own. Not just to gain more experience, but to start proving what can be done if you plan properly, know VFX, and think about production and post production in tandem.
But, like many people I know, I dragged my feet in going out and actually making something. The costs, the favors, the stress of all the equipment I’d “need” consumed me. But the new wave of DSLR’s made it much more feasible and after some testing, I felt comfortable that I could produce something decent without a big crew and a bank loan.
Ok, enough about me. Many of you probably have similar stories, or you wouldn’t be here.
After making a few simple shorts to get my feet wet (see http://www.vimeo.com/7580254), the Satin Dollz tracked me down and asked if I would direct something for them. I had no budget, but full creative control, an open-ended timetable, and something that proved invaluable if you’re trying to doing anything independent: free dedicated help.
Since this was a promo for the girls, they were extremely committed to the project. One of them worked at a facility with a soundstage, so she managed to get it donated. Another took care of most of the costumes, hair, and makeup. I’d pop in at their rehearsals or in a dressing room before a show and shoot VFX tests. They’d shift their schedules around to accommodate mine. I know how hard it is to wrangle friends to help on projects for more than a day, so this was a tremendous bonus.
I wasn’t planning on doing something this lavish. I wasn’t planning on taking a few months off to do post production (oh, did I mention I have a very loving, supportive wife?). But, with all this free help and some early look tests that proved the whole thing would work, I seized the opportunity to make a portfolio piece I could be proud of.
So, to bring this back to our main discussion, I’m still quite proud of that $2000 price tag. The big reason I posted a Making Of video was because I started showing people, and they wrote it off as extremely expensive puff piece. It made me feel like I did my job a little too well. Personally, I think there’s tremendous value in how much a filmmaker can achieve on a budget. Think of what scrappy resourceful directors like Neill Blomkamp or Terry Gilliam can achieve on a fraction of the budgets Brett Ratner or McG get?
On all these low-budget projects that pop up online, some simple math can tell you that almost no one gets paid. Those crews are usually involved b/c they want to be part of the project. What’s important is to look at in these little films is where those filmmakers spent the tiny budgets. A big reason guys like Stu Maschwitz and Vincent have been so exceptional is because they choose to spend in all the right places.
Hopefully there will be producers or companies out there that understand what it all means and see what potential I could bring to a properly funded project, where everyone gets paid. Granted, there might be producers who see this and ask me to make a feature for pennies, but that doesn’t mean I will. But, if I decide to make my own project for pennies, I now have a better understanding of what’s possible.
Also, the big reason I agree with Vincent and wanted him to post this article, isn’t because of how a producer may expect certain things from me. It’s what they might expect of others.
There are producers out there who might see the Satin Dollz video and expect that budget to cover what they envision. So, don’t be afraid to lay things out for them. Start by drafting up a proper “professional” budget estimate and then discuss where you can safely cut corners. That way the producer can see exactly why you’re asking for $XX,XXX and whether he/she really has the money to do the project.
If a producer won’t budge, you should think long and hard about getting involved on the project. It may be a right call for you to stay, if it’s a project you love or a great reel piece. Or it may be in your best interest to slowly, carefully, step away….
Dith Y. Reply:
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:30 pm
@Dan Blank, and Dan, Thanks for sharing The Making of “Whatever Lola Wants”, your work is inspiring.
Rob Shaver Reply:
October 5th, 2010 at 1:57 pm
@Dan Blank, You said, “they wrote it off as extremely expensive puff piece”. If they are potential customers but wrote it off, then I’d think you don’t want to work for them anyway. You’ve got a great calling card here.
Don’t devalue it by saying it only cost you $2000 when it did actually cost you more than that. Your time and that of your friends and the work put in by the Satin Dollz … that all has value even if it didn’t come out of your pocket.
So here’s my suggestion. For this production list all the work and materials with estimates of what it would have cost if everyone had been paid and nothing donated.
What would the Satin Dollz have charged for being in a commercial of that length or for doing this number in a movie? Count costumes, rehearsal time, choreography, music, etc.
Count up your crew-hours and rates for each job … that includes you as camera operator, director, editor, FX supervisor, etc.
Then tell folks that’s what it should have cost but you did it for less … but don’t tell them how much less. Just tell them that you can give them this quality and your prices are “very reasonable”.
Just a thought.
Reading the article from top to the bottom, I totally agree with your point, Vince. Thanks for pointing this out. And that “FAST-CHEAP-GOOD” is simply memorable. We wish that all clients value FAST & GOOD production with more value.
To all film-makers, don’t undersell your talent, time & any resources that you dump in your works. Don’t be a starving artist, but entrepreneur artist.
Lots of good thoughts here.
Dan, that is a wonderful piece and you should be proud to have created a personal project with that high of a production value for such a reasonable monetary cost. Especially since it is something obviously many people enjoy by how many views you are getting on-line.
The conversations here were starting to head down a deeper track than the point Vincent was trying to make in his post. His point is about how you need to think about your work – as your business. The most basic principal in business is that you must make more money than your costs and efforts in order to survive as a business.
But, what is interesting here is Dan’s example. What Dan did was a personal project – he created a piece of visual art – for himself, the people he worked with to create it, and for the world at large…. This wasn’t for a client, an ad agency, a major corporation, or even a minor corporation. And it is extremely important to think about why you create what you create and for who.
There is a big difference between creating a spec. commercial spot and creating a short film you have been thinking about for years that you’ve been dying to get into the world. Budgets don’t matter on projects created for your art. That’s why basically all artists are broke – they do what they love only and pay absolutely no attention whatsoever to what the cost is in time, blood, sweet, tear, or money to produce what comes from them. Art isn’t created to push someone else’s crap products. Do you think anyone ever watched a drug commercial and said, “Man, what an inspiring piece of visual art.” Hell no, and they never will. And do you think those directs make drug commercials for anything but a fair price? Hell no, and they never will either because lives to short to make crap advertising if you aren’t getting paid.
That is a big part of what makes being in a creative profession so hard… how to balance, your art, your talent, your time, your money, you business and every aspect of your life.
Every time you start a new project you need to think – is this my art? Or is this my business? You can do both – and sometimes they will overlap, but I’ve found that most of the time they don’t – even working in a creative profession. Most clients are not ready or open to true art. They need to sell their crap – that is what is most important to them.
When it comes to business never – ever sell yourself short. When it comes to art – never ever hold back no matter the cost. Just make sure you find a balance or you’ll end up on one of two sides of a coin – rich and soulless or broke and jaded.
Where do you fall on that coin? How about you Vincent?
Clark
Greg Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 2:25 am
@Clark Patrick, Nice thanks for sharing that! Its hard to find someone that balances it good, do you think Gregory Crewdson balances it decently??.. I don’t know much about him but that he does his fine art & ever so often does something for the movie studios,products or something.
Clark Patrick Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 9:52 am
@Greg,
Gregory Crewdson’s work is great… and def. leans toward the fine arts world. I guess it’s a good example of doing what you want. If you want to do your own work… do it. But, I wonder about his background? I’m not sure how his work is sustainable… Without knowing anything about him I would guess he came from a wealthy background.
Greg Reply:
October 10th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
@Clark Patrick, Yeah I was wondering who funds his shoots cuz dang its hmi,set design,film crews for a photograph.. so im thinking his photos must sell for the 2 digit thousands..
I was so happy to hear about this seminar that talks about the balance, im so feelin this I hope its good check it:
http://asmpla20101020.eventbrite.com/
Great points here! Imagemaking whether it be stills or motion requires talent. Just because we
can do it faster surely doesn’t mean it should be cheaper.
In today’s economy it is hard enough to make a living when clients squeeze every drop of energy from you and want to reward you with low rates.
Stand up for your rates!
Great stuff Dan and a wonderful voice on the subject.
Alan
Excellent formula concept (fast-cheap-good). Loved your explanation, Vincent. I plan to use this. Very effective communication. Thanks.
It’s not easy out here being a pimp.
When I first saw your second paragraph begin with “Dan told me that he produced this entire video for around $2,000.00” I was instantly repulsed. Thinking that you were were perpetuating this myth of fast cheap and good. I’m pleased that I continued reading to learn you were preaching to the masses of new artists who might inadvertently be undercutting working pros.
Recently had a client of two years ask me to lower my rates. Now I am a real specialist in my field (one that requires great endurance, knowledge of my sport, and the ability to speak French, German, and Italian) and it really took me by surprise that they would ask this as I had already settled a rate lower than usual as they gave me lots of consistent work. I had to bite my lip and say “no” and I lost the job. Well the client went with the low-ballers for a few smaller jobs. As the big event of the year approached, they realized how unhappy they were with who they had hired. Again they asked if I could lower my rate. Again my reply was “no”. Keep in mind I block out the entire month of July for this gig every year. Well another company hears that I am available and hires me on one phone call.
Sure enough, client 1 calls back as the higher ups wanna know why they are working with the crappy low baller and not me. “Sorry, I’m already booked”, was my happy reply when they came back with my original rate.
Now client 1 is booking up my time as much as they can. And I got to figure out what to do when client 2 calls for again for the big event.
Good luck to all. If you love it, it’s worth it.
-Christopher
Henry Reply:
October 7th, 2010 at 3:58 pm
@C.Keiser,
“Well the client went with the low-ballers for a few smaller jobs. As the big event of the year approached, they realized how unhappy they were with who they had hired. Again they asked if I could lower my rate. Again my reply was “no”. Keep in mind I block out the entire month of July for this gig every year. Well another company hears that I am available and hires me on one phone call.”
I absolutely enjoyed reading your comment. Quality cost money. The belief, value & confidence you have in your work is clear to see. I hope people are inspired to take a stance and stand up for their talent. Cheap is not always cheerful, and those who opt for cheap and it doesn’t work out, often come back running.
Clark Patrick Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 9:53 am
@C.Keiser,
Nice,
I’m also glad to hear this story. I’ve had a couple similar things happen for me a well.
Am I the only person that took offense at the way you used Dan as a scapegoat. You mention in the comments that you aren’t “dogging him” yet it sounds like that to me too. I think expressing your opinion to Dan about his “costs” directly to him rather than using your very public forum was a bad call.
It strikes me as an underhanded insult to imply that he shouldn’t have said it cost him X to make it but then say you made the same mistake by saying reverie cost you Y. Your comments are coming from a successful TV commercial director. I think it wouldn’t be as insulting were you still the photographer trying his hand at film making.
“Hi, I’m a director that shoots TV commercials with budgets in the hundreds of thousands and you are bringing down the industry by saying that you made a great commercial for the Satin Dollz for $2k. Oh by the way I love your work”
Giulio Sciorio Reply:
October 11th, 2010 at 12:36 pm
@chuck, Dan is not being put down or being used as a scape goat. Thicken your skin Chuck. Do you work for a living? This budget should be 20 grand easy.
It’s one thing to say a video was done on a budget but to say it was done for two grand then to show how its done educates any potential clients the wrong way.
So now he’s going to open the door to cheep clients that think if he can do that for two grand what can he do for three grand. Or worse they will say they are on a budget and only have $500.
Cheep clients will work hard to convince this talented artist that he should continue to work for cheep so that in the future more work will come his way (for cheep) and he’ll make the money on the backend.
Dan is either in college and/or living at home. If he’s living on his own it can’t be a good one.
This trend of broadcasting how awesome you are because you work for cheep is disturbing. I make my living as a photographer and its hard enough to cover all the expenses of the business let alone living expenses.
The average person wants to make more money. Would you broadcast that you work for $5.00 a day? That would be embarrassing yet for this young generation of talented artists they broadcast it like they are proud of it.
If this generation puts as much time and energy into marketing and running a good business as they do flashy effects they would have some nice careers ahead of them. As it is you’re going to see a lot of hobbyists struggle to keep they day jobs and dream about working as a well paid artist for a living.
I feel for them.
i totally understand dan blank when he puts
the money aside of the ‘difficulties’ list,
because it is almost impossible to accomplish
what he has done without a kiloton of grey matter,
a thousand cubic pounds of creative energy
and a lovely girl pond. they were ready to shoot
before he arrived, he took it all beyond with a brilliant screenplay and kamera planning and the movie effects are mesmerizing. we should create more films like these in our spare time to forward the field and open up conditions to reach high skies blues. congrats Dan !
if you need script consulting, i’ll give a free screenplay development from http://www.paradigmadigital.net
saluti, cheers from Rio de Janeiro ! Roman!
An extremely important point, directly but sensitively made, that can apply to many areas of creative endeavor. The tech we have allows us to do more for less but that means we have more skills than we used to have and the financial recompense should reflect that.
First off, I want to say I love Dan’s piece. Having met Vincent through Creative Live, I can say I am confident both with what he wrote and working with him that as he said he is not dogging Dan. But questioning the reality of CHEAP.
This piece speaks to me as does the Good-cheap-fast problem. I rarely post on a blog but felt compelled.
I am a progressing independent filmmaker. I have not been working in the industry for 20 years, but I have been working on understanding all aspects of video/film for over 10 years including FX. And my portfolio shows it, a lot of camera tests, matchmoving tests etc.. but I am short on the piece that puts it all together like Dan’s. There is a funny thing, people hire you to do what you show them you can do. Enter 2000 dollar film.
What I believe this discussion gets to the heart of is changes in technology as they affect the film industry and experience. If there weren’t HDSLR’s then the CHEAP part would rarely be associated with the good as was the case prior. As it was prior– a short on film was 20,000 dollars unless you went from video and transferred to film because Sundance wouldn’t show it unless it was film. So to put 20,000 dollars into a short film project–you had to be a confident person as I suspect not many without a patron will take that leap because that is a BIG failure if it doesn’t fly. 10,000 dollars was the going rate for CHEAP then.
The practice of posting a price tag on the money outlayed is a debate to me. Movies are made in timeframes. If it is personal, whatever timeframe works, if it is commercial there is a specific timeline. Postproduction is considered part of the process, but if it is not shot on film, it can become a personal process whereas it used to be more likely to be done by someone else–if the person is knowledgeable enough they can do it now. I don’t believe any personal project should be beholden to the “actual cost” issue as if it were done for a commercial. That is apples and oranges. Also, my bigger point.– I don’t think Dan said this was FAST!
So to me, the GOOD- CHEAP – FAST doesn’t apply unless you use the whole triangle. And what has ever been done that is truly good without experience? Nothing that isn’t a fluke. And Flukes aren’t easy to come by.
I believe you can only apply the triangle process above when all sides of the triangle are included. I.E. this film is GOOD, it was CHEAP (because of favors which is the only way a film can be cheap), and it wasn’t FAST because Dan planned his ass off and spent years and years of learning including college and FX. The GOOD-CHEAP-FAST holds true. He chose slow and good. The bigger problem is SLOW when defining it.
I can say I am skratching the surface of Dan’s level of knowledge after 15 years of learning ( depends on how you count them). And I, like him would like to create a piece that puts it all together as he did. So his piece is an inspiration to me.
Does it hurt the industry. In my opinion no. Because anyone with a mild awareness of the process knows that it wasn’t fast in a case like this. Because they can see the experience jump off the screen.
The illusion persists in other areas like Music. Everyone talks and thinks about the one hit wonder. But when you learn about the road the artist took, there is almost never such a thing. And it wasn’t fast.
Just looking at it, it is clear that Dan knows chromakeying, matchmoving, rotoscoping, chromakey lighting, previsualization, color correction, color temperatures, art direction, editing, audio syncing, etc…etc… he was, for this film the equivalent of the Director, DP, Sound Engineer, Editor, FX supervisor, compositor, color corrector, etc… who is going to pay for all of that unless you are going to stick a bottle of ” What Lola Wants” perfume in there for the talent to caress the entire piece and then reshoot after Sue from Marketing feels it doesn’t hit the target audience for the 1000 store chains. Oh, and BTW Sue will not allow you to include it in your demo reel because of rights issues. ENTER COMMERCIAL BUDGET WITH LINE ITEMS AND TIME TRACKING 🙂
Sue needs to pay for that hell everyone has experienced. That is not an inspiration or a personal piece.
So what Dan has done for 2000 dollars is demonstrate years of education and a type of film he wants to do more of so people can find him. How do you value that education in the line item for the budget, you don’t. You hire the guy to direct that type of piece because you love it. In my opinion the answer to Vincents comment about Revirie is no different to this piece. Be open about it, and state that it was an exception to the rule ( if they can’t figure that out just looking at it already they need to learn more). Things can be less expensive now depending on what you are doing but expereince ( AKA TIME) is always a factor.
As an example, take Roger Federrer the tennis player. Give him a wooden raquet and he will kick your ass with it. Not because of the technology, but because of the knowhow. What Roger couldn’t do is speed up the set any faster than 6-0, 6-0. And if you ask him why he did it, because he wanted to show what he could do it, but I doubt he would make a career off of it. That is common I believe in both Dan’s and Vincent’s piece. The man makes it, not the budget.
And to comment on some of the rants about craiglist kids. If they can kick your ass with a wooden raquet, so be it. If they can kick your ass with a new hybrid raquet, you better be aware of how to play them and realize the game is changing. Not get mad that you have to be competitive in a field whre you have previously been winning. And you may have to change your game a bit or explain your tournament fees, but realize you have a strong history you can rely on and be confident in that.
So to advertise a exhibition with a wooden raquet is not wrong ( 2000 dollar video), if it displays the skills of the professional and inspires many. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist for a fan of Roger Federer with all the most current gear to shank the first forehand high into the air.
And thus the fan’s concept of FAST flies away with the first stroke. But he may continue to learn and be inspired by Dan and Vincent’s work.
What’s Going down i’m new to this, I stumbled upon this I have found It positively helpful and it has aided me out loads. I am hoping to contribute & aid other customers like its aided me. Great job.
It is unusual for me to discover something on the net thats as entertaining and fascinating as what youve got here. Your page is sweet, your graphics are outstanding, and whats more, you use reference that are relevant to what youre saying. Youre definitely one in a million, great job!
Buy Ray Ban Knockoffs http://www.forestjournal.jp/knockoff.php?pid=42