What do you charge? at DVinfo.net

Giuseppe Palumbo · November 16th, 2005, 11:16 PM

Im just wondering what you guys charge as a base price for music videos. I know it all has to do with locations and what not but appx. what are your ranges?

Rob Lohman · November 21st, 2005, 04:24 AM

Giuseppe: I have moved your thread to a more appropriate forum, namely our
business forum. I know we have a lot of forums here on the boards, but
please try to put a new subject in the best possible one. Thanks!

Craig Seeman · November 21st, 2005, 09:02 AM

I shoot lots of bands, usually 3 camera shoots. I find I can make more money doing that than making music videos. I find most bands aren't willing to pay what I think it should cost for a music video. The main reason is that posting a music video takes more hours than editing a 3 camera shoot in most cases. Lots of FX and revisions.

There should be a tight story board with a list of how the FX and the Audio sync is being handled if you're to give a flat rate. Otherwise do an hourly or day rate (with defined hours).

Don't use the camera mic if you want the video to be at all useful. Some will lip sync to a CD of the music or you can take an abstract concept or storyline with some lead vocals and lead instrument sync shoots.

Assuming your life expenses (rent, food) are low at your age and you're not neck deep in dept from your equipment purchases you might go obscenely low at $300 a day ($37.50/hr) as a starving artist/newbie rate. Depending on your concept think of 1 day shoot and 2-5 days of post. That's $900-$1800.

The band needs to know WHY they're doing a music video. What's the marketing purpose. If it's getting gigs in clubs or performance reviews in the local press or show an indy record label , a live concert shoot serves them better and for less money. For most lesser known bands, I believe touring will do more to promote the music than a music video and indy labels can judge the stage presence on an edited live shoot much beter than a music video.

Music videos are done to sell songs to the public (unless they want to sell the video itself . . . an "iTunes" idea). It means the public should have a way of seeing the music video. I think having mp3 30 second song samples and/or maybe one free download on a web page might do more to sell music of an unknown band than a music video. Music videos seem to be vanity projects unless you have an MTV type channel willing to play them and create "buzz." Most bands, when confronted with even the above low ball price, will balk.

November 16th, 2005, 11:16 PM	#1
Giuseppe Palumbo Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Cleveland, Ohio Posts: 199 Images: 7	What do you charge? Im just wondering what you guys charge as a base price for music videos. I know it all has to do with locations and what not but appx. what are your ranges? __________________ AIM - N film B www.nbfilms.us

November 21st, 2005, 04:24 AM	#2
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	Giuseppe: I have moved your thread to a more appropriate forum, namely our business forum. I know we have a lot of forums here on the boards, but please try to put a new subject in the best possible one. Thanks! __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

November 21st, 2005, 09:02 AM	#3
Craig Seeman Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA Posts: 3,841	I shoot lots of bands, usually 3 camera shoots. I find I can make more money doing that than making music videos. I find most bands aren't willing to pay what I think it should cost for a music video. The main reason is that posting a music video takes more hours than editing a 3 camera shoot in most cases. Lots of FX and revisions. There should be a tight story board with a list of how the FX and the Audio sync is being handled if you're to give a flat rate. Otherwise do an hourly or day rate (with defined hours). Don't use the camera mic if you want the video to be at all useful. Some will lip sync to a CD of the music or you can take an abstract concept or storyline with some lead vocals and lead instrument sync shoots. Assuming your life expenses (rent, food) are low at your age and you're not neck deep in dept from your equipment purchases you might go obscenely low at $300 a day ($37.50/hr) as a starving artist/newbie rate. Depending on your concept think of 1 day shoot and 2-5 days of post. That's $900-$1800. The band needs to know WHY they're doing a music video. What's the marketing purpose. If it's getting gigs in clubs or performance reviews in the local press or show an indy record label , a live concert shoot serves them better and for less money. For most lesser known bands, I believe touring will do more to promote the music than a music video and indy labels can judge the stage presence on an edited live shoot much beter than a music video. Music videos are done to sell songs to the public (unless they want to sell the video itself . . . an "iTunes" idea). It means the public should have a way of seeing the music video. I think having mp3 30 second song samples and/or maybe one free download on a web page might do more to sell music of an unknown band than a music video. Music videos seem to be vanity projects unless you have an MTV type channel willing to play them and create "buzz." Most bands, when confronted with even the above low ball price, will balk.