And this shows exactly how far from reality people are when hiring people for video

Josh Bass · February 11th, 2015, 12:03 PM

handful of legit jobs over the last 13 years for me via CL. reality may be what was stated above, but in that case gear prices need to fall drastically (even MORE drastically) to make it viable for anyone to make a living that way.

Ken Diewert · February 11th, 2015, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin McRoberts

My current largest client, who four years later books enough business to almost double my circa-2008 full time salary, was secured by responding to a Craigslist posting.

I used to comb through rolls of half dollars and quarters looking for the odd pre-'64 silver coin... there might be an analogy there.

True... I once shot a 'celebration of life' after first turning it down. The subject of the celebration was the CEO of a fairly large company. Said company needed some video work shortly after, and called me. They have been a great and regular client for over 5 years now.

And my now largest client started with a very small job. So go figure...

I guess when we pan for gold (or silver quarters), we just have to figure out which are the best rivers to stand in.

Josh Bass · February 11th, 2015, 09:31 PM

I have not had one of those success stories. My two "regulars" are people I met through my more legit freelance work, all my cheapos and freebies never panned out to anything.

David Barnett · February 13th, 2015, 09:18 AM

I dunno, I think being are being hard on the OP. In theory, were taxed on our wages. So $100 is $70 real dollars. Of the $70, at least $10 would be spent on gas, so it's making $60. Shooting 3 90 minute games = 5 hours time at least being there (probably more like 6 but I'll throw them a bone) as there are likely breaks between games, plus showing up minimum 15 minutes early to setup & be sure you're there in case traffic etc.. So 5 hours @ $60 = $12hr just for shooting.

Then factor in editing (WTF) the highlights, granted simple editing but 3 seperate games would be a PITA. I'd put that at 2 hours. Then exporting & uploading1 hour. And anyone who's done jobs remotely similar to this knows there's an extra hour of BS in there somewhere, so it's up to 10 hours time.

10 hours $60 = $6 hour??

No thanks. Sure maybe a high school or college kid may take this on looking for gas or beer money.... but they'll quickly learn it really wasn't that well worth their time.

Ken Diewert · February 13th, 2015, 11:22 AM

Someone will do this job, at that price. When you look at who many cameras have been sold, and how many NLE systems are in use, - well, it's inevitable that someone will do it. Maybe a kid still living in his parents basement, attending youtube university (not that there's anything wrong with that).

What's sadder, working for 6 bucks an hour, or paying $50,000 to go to film school to make 6 bucks an hour.

Technology has made Video production a commodity. While we rant about making cameras cheaper, we are lowering the barriers of entry for our competition. Lots of competition... It's all good, because the other side of that equation is that every company now looks at shooting promotional videos, and cheap bandwidth has allowed everyone to play. But these companies want pro's, not joe's... to represent their brand. That's where we come in.

Josh Bass · February 13th, 2015, 04:07 PM

I think the saying is "water finds its own level."

Chances are, the people who work for this little are really not very experienced/good --though I suppose it's possible a pro could fall on hard times/become really desperate-- but I would think for the most part people working for this little are very new to the industry or just not that good and have never earned "professional" rates, etc. and so think this is normal. You know there are CLIENTS who turn people down when they come in too low on a quote 'cause it sets off red flags to the client that this vendor may have no idea what they're doing, right????

Likewise, chances are clients who pay rates like this, while expecting something not to be TERRIBLE, are not expecting Hollywood-level cinematography/production values. Again, I'm sure occasionally they are, but those things will self-correct after one or two shoots and they'll realize money offered = skill level found.

Pros who command higher rates will simply ignore gigs like this and clients with very low budgets will likely not try to hire those folks anyway. So the low budget people and the high budget people on both the client and the vendor side will find each other, basically, one occasionally crossing over into the other, and harmony will continue in the universe. Dig?

February 11th, 2015, 12:03 PM	#31
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	Re: And this shows exactly how far from reality people are when hiring people for vid handful of legit jobs over the last 13 years for me via CL. reality may be what was stated above, but in that case gear prices need to fall drastically (even MORE drastically) to make it viable for anyone to make a living that way. __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

February 11th, 2015, 09:31 PM	#33
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	Re: And this shows exactly how far from reality people are when hiring people for vid I have not had one of those success stories. My two "regulars" are people I met through my more legit freelance work, all my cheapos and freebies never panned out to anything. __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

February 13th, 2015, 09:18 AM	#34
David Barnett Major Player Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Philly, PA Posts: 951	Re: And this shows exactly how far from reality people are when hiring people for vid I dunno, I think being are being hard on the OP. In theory, were taxed on our wages. So $100 is $70 real dollars. Of the $70, at least $10 would be spent on gas, so it's making $60. Shooting 3 90 minute games = 5 hours time at least being there (probably more like 6 but I'll throw them a bone) as there are likely breaks between games, plus showing up minimum 15 minutes early to setup & be sure you're there in case traffic etc.. So 5 hours @ $60 = $12hr just for shooting. Then factor in editing (WTF) the highlights, granted simple editing but 3 seperate games would be a PITA. I'd put that at 2 hours. Then exporting & uploading1 hour. And anyone who's done jobs remotely similar to this knows there's an extra hour of BS in there somewhere, so it's up to 10 hours time. 10 hours $60 = $6 hour?? No thanks. Sure maybe a high school or college kid may take this on looking for gas or beer money.... but they'll quickly learn it really wasn't that well worth their time.

February 13th, 2015, 11:22 AM	#35
Ken Diewert Trustee Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Vancouver Island, Canada Posts: 1,200	Re: And this shows exactly how far from reality people are when hiring people for vid Someone will do this job, at that price. When you look at who many cameras have been sold, and how many NLE systems are in use, - well, it's inevitable that someone will do it. Maybe a kid still living in his parents basement, attending youtube university (not that there's anything wrong with that). What's sadder, working for 6 bucks an hour, or paying $50,000 to go to film school to make 6 bucks an hour. Technology has made Video production a commodity. While we rant about making cameras cheaper, we are lowering the barriers of entry for our competition. Lots of competition... It's all good, because the other side of that equation is that every company now looks at shooting promotional videos, and cheap bandwidth has allowed everyone to play. But these companies want pro's, not joe's... to represent their brand. That's where we come in. __________________ C100, 5DMk2, FCPX

February 13th, 2015, 04:07 PM	#36
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	Re: And this shows exactly how far from reality people are when hiring people for vid I think the saying is "water finds its own level." Chances are, the people who work for this little are really not very experienced/good --though I suppose it's possible a pro could fall on hard times/become really desperate-- but I would think for the most part people working for this little are very new to the industry or just not that good and have never earned "professional" rates, etc. and so think this is normal. You know there are CLIENTS who turn people down when they come in too low on a quote 'cause it sets off red flags to the client that this vendor may have no idea what they're doing, right???? Likewise, chances are clients who pay rates like this, while expecting something not to be TERRIBLE, are not expecting Hollywood-level cinematography/production values. Again, I'm sure occasionally they are, but those things will self-correct after one or two shoots and they'll realize money offered = skill level found. Pros who command higher rates will simply ignore gigs like this and clients with very low budgets will likely not try to hire those folks anyway. So the low budget people and the high budget people on both the client and the vendor side will find each other, basically, one occasionally crossing over into the other, and harmony will continue in the universe. Dig? __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB