Wages Of Big Hit DP's

[dracul]

I suspect many will steer away from posting real figures but perhaps those that are anonymous can.

I shot about 15 music videos on film about 5 years ago but they were all low budget and i never charged more the $500/shoot day. Well, i've been dormant for the last 5 years in this business pursuing other things and now my needs and perspectives have changed.

While I have a reel its not impressive enough to get the big budget hip hop videos or commercials, features etc...

So, my plan is to invest a min of $50k -$100k wisely in a demo using the red entirely of course. I would however only do this if I had a pretty good chance I could charge 10k/day as a DP. Of course I understand even after my 100k reel investment I need to get some big jobs under my belt first. Perhaps 15-25 commercials?
Is this realistic or am i living a dream?
Also I have heard some of these ASC guys can charge 30k per day for commercials. Is this true?

[NateWeaver]

I would however only do this if I had a pretty good chance I could charge 10k/day as a DP.

There's a lot that goes into people being able to have day rates like that. Chops are mandatory, of course, but it also has to do with networking, luck, and convincing other people that your work is great.

In other words, there's DPs out there that are very, very good and can do top level work, but don't pull in rock star rates like that. Why? There's as many factors as there are stars in the sky. But just assuming you get the chops after spending $100k to develop your reel is dubious logic as well, and that's just for starters.

However, with that said, I know my DP skills never took off until I had access to a good camera and just went and shot as much as I could. If buying a Red is part of that for you, my personal experience would be that that part would be sound.

[David Mullen ASC]

Commercial rates are much higher than feature or TV rates -- generally your week rate on a feature is the same as your day rate on a commercial.

Features tend to not pay much more than a few thousand a week over guild (IATSE) minimum unless you are one of the most successful DP's. Otherwise the studios are pretty insistent on keeping crew costs down -- salaries in the past decade have hardly risen overall for below-the-line folks, including DP's.

[James T Mather]

if I had a pretty good chance I could charge 10k/day as a DP.

Sounds a little like dreamland to me but I don't know about the US. I've been a Dp for 15 years shooting pretty exclusively on commercials and I haven't heard of anyone earning that kind of money - I shot a commercial with a top flight Us director (now a stong features name) a couple of years ago and he was on 14k a day as the director - so I can't imagine that his US DP is earning the same (or twice) what he would be in general - I certainly wasn't. I know that people reckon I'm in a highly (over)paid part of the film business but the figures you're talking (30,000) sound like oscar nom or household name DPs.

In short if you have 100 grand to drop on a demo you might be better off holding onto it for a more surefire investment. Plus if you've been dormant for five years and your last work was 500 dollar a day videos - what makes you think you're now worth 20 times that? I would exercise caution.

[dracul]

Commercial rates are much higher than feature or TV rates -- generally your week rate on a feature is the same as your day rate on a commercial.

Features tend to not pay much more than a few thousand a week over guild (IATSE) minimum unless you are one of the most successful DP's. Otherwise the studios are pretty insistent on keeping crew costs down -- salaries in the past decade have hardly risen overall for below-the-line folks, including DP's.

Thank you, i used to work for partners a big commercial house in toronto , you may have heard the local dp's were charging about 3500 a day but that was about 6 years ago. However, they would at times fly in usa dp's ussually with the us directors and heard these guys charge 10k/day. Do you know of anyone particularly charging this in la?
What about for this expensive HIP HOP videos?

[dracul]

Sounds a little like dreamland to me but I don't know about the US. I've been a Dp for 15 years shooting pretty exclusively on commercials and I haven't heard of anyone earning that kind of money - I shot a commercial with a top flight Us director (now a stong features name) a couple of years ago and he was on 14k a day as the director - so I can't imagine that his US DP is earning the same (or twice) what he would be in general - I certainly wasn't. I know that people reckon I'm in a highly (over)paid part of the film business but the figures you're talking (30,000) sound like oscar nom or household name DPs.

In short if you have 100 grand to drop on a demo you might be better off holding onto it for a more surefire investment. Plus if you've been dormant for five years and your last work was 500 dollar a day videos - what makes you think you're now worth 20 times that? I would exercise caution.

Well you are correct, I cannot claim I am worth 10k/day infact I remember seeing these commercial dps working on set all day thinking why is this guy better then that other guy that charges only 3500? And he wasn't any better. he could charge that only because he worked with so and so director who just shot the latest janet jackson or madonna video. Thats all.
But after my reel I could shoot a few big name videos or perhaps only one and everything could change from that moment. Suddently, everyone wants me because i just shot that so and so video. ... Commercial and video folk are like that... aren't they?

[James T Mather]

Commercial and video folk are like that... aren't they?

They sure are - it's a lottery in that regard. I was merely suggesting caution if you were going to drop 100k on a demo - you might never get it back. First rule of the film business : Never spend your own money ;)

[dracul]

They sure are - it's a lottery in that regard. I was merely suggesting caution if you were going to drop 100k on a demo - you might never get it back. First rule of the film business : Never spend your own money ;)

ok. caution acknowledged, perhaps i should scale that down. Perhaps i am exagerating things, it may be sufficient to just do more freebies and some cheap day rates. I remember in toronto i did lots of low budget music videos some free some paid but could not move to something bigger. Perhaps it was only lack of networking.

[James T Mather]

In the main DP's tend to move because a director that they have supported will get a break and pull them with him. On the other hand they may say "hasta la swissta" and wave from their limo whilst snorting coke off a call girls pally-valley. In that sense it's a lottery. Networking and forming bonds with directors is the key generally.

EDIT : I generally tend to find that Dp's become respectable after a few years of good work and producers and production companies get a good feel for them. In the main directors want a willing collaborator and producers want to feel that you are reasonable to deal with - I've seen many Dp's push the budget out - threatening to bankrupt the producer - get terrific images and never work with that production company again. It's not just about stunning work. It's about the complete package.

[dracul]

In the main DP's tend to move because a director that they have supported will get a break and pull them with him. On the other hand they may say "hasta la swissta" and wave from their limo whilst snorting coke off a call girls pally-valley. In that sense it's a lottery. Networking and forming bonds with directors is the key generally.

EDIT : I generally tend to find that Dp's become respectable after a few years of good work and producers and production companies get a good feel for them. In the main directors want a willing collaborator and producers want to feel that you are reasonable to deal with - I've seen many Dp's push the budget out - threatening to bankrupt the producer - get terrific images and never work with that production company again. It's not just about stunning work. It's about the complete package.

Thanks. The problem however I found in toronto, canada was most producers and productions are not willing to risk hiring a new little experienced DP. I heard people saying I should try the usa because people are more willing to give newbies a chance and therefore more risk takers.

[NateWeaver]

Thanks. The problem however I found in toronto, canada was most producers and productions are not willing to risk hiring a new little experienced DP. I heard people saying I should try the usa because people are more willing to give newbies a chance and therefore more risk takers.

I doubt that. Producers, directors don't magically change their criteria for picking DPs on a geographic basis.

It's tough to break in everywhere.

[David Mullen ASC]

I've shot thirty features and one TV series, and only two commercials... it's a hard business to break into, clients and agencies are spending a lot of money and like to cover their bets by hiring a top DP who has done similar work, which is why in commercials you have experts in shooting cars or food or children or dogs, etc.

But the rates are nice if you can get the job. The Mastercard commercial I shot paid $5000/day and an Ambien CR commercial paid $3000/day.

So while 10K/day is certainly possible, you may want to set your income goals a little lower initially...

[James T Mather]

Those figures are more in line with my experience.

Where your break comes from and how you are perceived are difficult things to control - I was lucky as a guy I met in film school left it and got signed as a director (he's a tenacious SOB) - and pulled me along to shoot for him before I left film school. On one of my first jobs I was shooting a commercial age 23 with a cam op who had worked on one of the Star Wars films (at which stage I would have been 7 years old). Nerve wracking stuff but he was a nice fella.

At the time where I live it was a precious few people involved in film and producers wanted a regime change (cameramen talking 2 days to light a beer etc). I was lucky and timing was my ally - i got a break - since then I have shot about a commercial a week (on average) - I could have done the exact same things with no result. It's impossible to say.

Just be careful - I know lots of people who never cracked it (and, believe me, I know lots of them, more than success stories - the people who were successful were mostly persistent). The argument from the unsuccessful people (usually after they approach you with a few beers) is that it is a "closed shop" (as though I go bowling with the producers) - nothing could be farther from the truth. Mostly they are not hired simply because they are unknown quantities. How would they change this? I haven't a clue. Its a lot like acting - John Travolta, number one actor in 1980 (for example) - ten years later can't get a job to save his life - along comes Pulp Fiction (directed by a Travolta fanboy) and boom! 20 mil a picture. Why? i don't know - he was the same actor last week. Perception is all, it seems.

[dracul]

thank you all for your input. I used to think this money was good money but not any longer. Not when you consider what you have to do to get there and such uncertainties.

[Jim McKinney]

I'd say go for it, as far as the d.p. thing, if that's what your heart really desires. But DON'T SPEND $100K for a demo. Maybe 10K, and ask a lot of favors for your one 1-2 day demo.

[James T Mather]

That sounds more rational.

Then blow the rest on coke and hookers.

[Mitch Deoudes]

Maybe a better question would be: "How hard is it to make a living at it?" To make an analogy: film school can cost you a heckuva lot more than $100k, but the chances of becoming a working feature film or commercial director aren't all that great... so if you end up doing industrials / waiting tables / whatever else the "rest" of the would-be directors are doing, how long will it take you to pay back that AFI tuition? I sort of feel like the situation must be better for DP's - but maybe someone who actually knows could chime in.


Mostly they are not hired simply because they are unknown quantities. How would they change this?

Not with a reel? That's strange to me... Comparing it to my own industry (visual fx) - if you've got a good reel, you work. Then again, vfx is a much younger field (the field, not the people - though the people are too, I guess), so there's not as much politics involved. And the salaries top out much lower.

p.s. - "palley valley?"

[Matthew Bennett]

It seems to me like artists of any kind will only work at jobs that are slightly below their potential or skill level. Producers are just so cautious that they would never hire anyone who 'might be able to do it if they really pushed themselves'. They want to know that you can come in and slaughter the job, absolutely do it with your eyes shut. So if you're hiring for a commercial shooting glamour, you want the guy who has done it two trillion times already and probably in reality is absolutely bored of doing it.

[Nik Manning]

I think this is a great question. I also don't think you need to spend 50k on a demo. You could spend maybe 20k. use 10k for a named actor for a day. 10k for the shoot and some favors.
I don't however think you should shoot no budgets anymore. No budgets are for learning. After 5 no budget music videos you should move up. Also music video budgets have shrunk to about 1/5 of what they use to be. Most big budget music videos now cost between 100k-250k. 5 years ago it was 500k-800k. I honestly would tell you to hire a great director for a day and some talent for a day and shoot a music video for a band that has a great song. This way you can be associated with breaking a band.

I would have a look at all Outkast and Busta Rhymes videos.
To directors to find out their DP's would be hype williams and joseph kahn. If you can come close to bringing that vision to life you can make 5k a day easy. Peace

[Jens Jakob Thorsen]

The daily commercial rate for a travelling DP, like me, here in the EU is aprox 2-3K euros= 3-4K$. Only very very high profile feature and commercial DPs get 7-10K$ a day

[S. Um]

It seems to me like artists of any kind will only work at jobs that are slightly below their potential or skill level. Producers are just so cautious that they would never hire anyone who 'might be able to do it if they really pushed themselves'. They want to know that you can come in and slaughter the job, absolutely do it with your eyes shut. So if you're hiring for a commercial shooting glamour, you want the guy who has done it two trillion times already and probably in reality is absolutely bored of doing it.

If that were always true, then there would never be any advances in film making (or anything else for that matter). Sometimes, if you have a good relationship with a director or producer, and they get a challenging job, they might ask you to come along, too. Sometimes you're doing something that no one has done before, and you have to innovate. I think you'll find that many successful people are always trying new things in order to stay on top of their game.

[donatello b]

producers are always looking for new talent ... bottom line is OK/good might not be good enough ... there's no problem finding ok/good DP's in LA ... they have their eye out for something more ... and many times they see it in new persons or even the OK Dp's that have been around and they give them a chance BUT if they don't deliver they could be replaced (maybe day before shoot , or day or 2 into shoot) .... kind of like the movie's where you see the "fixer" or "cleanup " guy come in ... same on projects -a kind of unspoken DP that doesn't get any credit and many dislike ...

[laguun]

some remarks from the european production side
- average music video clips have had their budgets slashed, as the music industry isnt doing well and the marketing utility of the clips is no longer anywhere near where it used to be in the early 90ties. in fact, in europe, many budgets are 10-20K, for the -full- production, and better paid productions see fierce competition between different dp/director tandems.
- for fullfeatures, europe (and to some extend canada) are getting lots of bookings from the USA, as wages are -extremely- lower here. excellent dps often are looking for work in the mid to upper $$$ daily region. Besides very few absolutely over-the-top dps, the $$$ ballpark seems to become the market majority over here.
- commercials are still wellpaid, however rather $.$$$, $$.$$$ is exceptional. however being networked with agencies, having recent highly acclaimed work and being connected with hip directors are usually more important than a reel. furthermore, most dps are specialized in a certain genre (as car/food/people/fluids etc) and agencies tend to choose between a few wellknown veterans.
- specialized DP skills (as in expert for MoCo etc) easily add 20-200% to any usual payment

therefore i would not recommend spending 100K for a reel to almost any german DP.

[Mitch Deoudes]

Here's a thought exercise that's been recurrent in my mind: taking the music industry as a model for predicting the film industry. (Very similar product, the difference being primarily bandwidth.)

With the advent of "democratizing" technologies such as desktop-based production software, internet distribution, etc., it's becoming easier and easier for an individual to produce and distribute content. But does this mean that everyone can be a rock star? No - it just means that the base of the pyramid is getting wider. Nor has it put an end to the Superstar the way some people predict - there are still the Cristina Aguileras and Spiderman 3's, even though everyone and his brother is on iTunes or YouTube.

So my question is: what has happened to the day rates of music industry trench-workers in recent years? Have they fallen? It seems like people are saying that's what's happening to DP's, even as the amount of overall production rises. (It certainly has happened in VFX, and much work has headed to India or Asia or that-kid-who-just-graduated.)

Discuss amongst y'selves. And I apologize for using lames phrases like "democratizing technologies".

[Hans von Sonntag]

The daily commercial rate for a travelling DP, like me, here in the EU is aprox 2-3K euros= 3-4K$. Only very very high profile feature and commercial DPs get 7-10K$ a day

True. Although there are some Director/DOPs (doing both in one time) that will earn a bit more.

Apart from this, showreels are about brands. An expensive looking showreel is much more worth than an artistc interesting one, at least in commercial land.

Hans

[David Mullen ASC]

If someone can afford to make a $100,000 demo reel... it seems to me that they are already quite successful in whatever their current career is...

[dracul]

It seems to me like artists of any kind will only work at jobs that are slightly below their potential or skill level. Producers are just so cautious that they would never hire anyone who 'might be able to do it if they really pushed themselves'. They want to know that you can come in and slaughter the job, absolutely do it with your eyes shut. So if you're hiring for a commercial shooting glamour, you want the guy who has done it two trillion times already and probably in reality is absolutely bored of doing it.

Thats what i have found also. I guess the people hiring you cannot be blamed. They treat it like a business and want to minimize risk. If I were a producer that's the route i would take.

[dracul]

If someone can afford to make a $100,000 demo reel... it seems to me that they are already quite successful in whatever their current career is...

Mr. Mullen, of course you are correct, however when I started dreaming about being a DP at 18 I was not thinking about doing as a career for income, living etc.. I chose it because it was the love of my life , lighting , moving images, in short the magic that a DP can create. I was particularly stimulated to shoot dark movies.

And so today many years later I still have this love for cinematography. After getting feedback from you and others on the reality of making money as a DP again recently, I would not currently consider shooting for a living since i feel my current entrepreneurship is more advantageous. However i want to do it because i love it.
Its also rather unfortunate that the industry does not recognize the difference between those who do it for the money and those who do it for the love of it since what really matters is to minimize risk.

[David Mullen ASC]

Most of us do it because we love it -- there are easier ways to make a living! It's because the industry recognizes that a lot of people do this for the love of it that they find it easy to exploit people... Why do you think it often pays better to shoot industrials and corporate videos than feature films? I spent a decade making less than $20,000 a year shooting three features a year on average, paid about $6000 a feature. If that isn't a sign that I was doing it for the love of it rather than the money, I don't know what would.

Whenever a beginner asks me "how much money can I hope to make?" I think to myself that they've got the wrong career in mind, because you do this work because you love it and can't imagine doing anything else. It's not really a career for dabblers or hobbyists either because the level of competition is so high, unless it really is just a hobby and not a career...

You have to ask yourself whether any successful DP ever spent $100,000 on a demo reel, and the answer would be probably not. Mainly because most couldn't afford that anyway, but most also didn't need to spend that much money.

[dracul]

If that were always true, then there would never be any advances in film making (or anything else for that matter). Sometimes, if you have a good relationship with a director or producer, and they get a challenging job, they might ask you to come along, too. Sometimes you're doing something that no one has done before, and you have to innovate. I think you'll find that many successful people are always trying new things in order to stay on top of their game.

But its not the newbies or inexperienced that make these innovations in the film industry. Not because they are not capable but because they don't get a chance. Film making is expensive. Other industries , sure the newbie who can use his computer from home to invent a new 3d software with no glasses etc...
But not where big money is involved. As far as the producer, director asking you to come along on a project, you can bet if there is big money involved and you are on board at least one money authority has been convinced that you can do the job just fine. If there is any doubt by the guy with the money, asta la vista for you. If on the other hand there is not so much money involved there is much more tolerance for "lets give the little guy a shot"

[dracul]

Most of us do it because we love it -- there are easier ways to make a living! It's because the industry recognizes that a lot of people do this for the love of it that they find it easy to exploit people... Why do you think it often pays better to shoot industrials and corporate videos than feature films? I spent a decade making less than $20,000 a year shooting three features a year on average, paid about $6000 a feature. If that isn't a sign that I was doing it for the love of it rather than the money, I don't know what would.

Whenever a beginner asks me "how much money can I hope to make?" I think to myself that they've got the wrong career in mind, because you do this work because you love it.

I was not implying that you are doing it for the money just in general many are especially those shooting commercials. Yes you are correct, for those wanting to make lots of money this is the wrong carreer. I thought I could trade my time for taking a DP path yet still making at least 500k per year but I realize that while that may be possible, its more of a long shot and will take many years to get there. And at this point, it would be smarter to just shoot my own projects with my own money.

[dracul]

producers are always looking for new talent ... bottom line is OK/good might not be good enough ... there's no problem finding ok/good DP's in LA ... they have their eye out for something more ... and many times they see it in new persons or even the OK Dp's that have been around and they give them a chance BUT if they don't deliver they could be replaced (maybe day before shoot , or day or 2 into shoot) .... kind of like the movie's where you see the "fixer" or "cleanup " guy come in ... same on projects -a kind of unspoken DP that doesn't get any credit and many dislike ...

So in this case there would be very little risk for the production don't you think. Say a 1mill picture would risk very little in one or 2 days of shooting? So why not give the little guy a chance more often?

[David Mullen ASC]

Well, for one producer, a $100,000 feature budget is a HUGE personal risk, whereas for another producer, a 10 million dollar movie is slumming it... obviously up-and-comers do get lucky breaks shooting something, usually because they are talented and willing to work cheap for the opportunity to move up. But generally the DP is one of those crew persons where the producer wants the least amount of risk involved in hiring, partly because their mistakes can be expensive and also because a DP often sets the pace of the production, since lighting set-ups are often the most time-consuming element of production.

[donatello b]

"So in this case there would be very little risk for the production don't you think. Say a 1mill picture would risk very little in one or 2 days of shooting? So why not give the little guy a chance more often?"

the risk could be very expensive ... the person getting the break has to do good during pre-production and the 1st few days of shooting ... sometimes when the DP goes - some of the their crew will walk - so it can be expensive to replace DP and crew that walked ...
BUT in general everything is in place when a key person gets ?? what's the word ? departs , walks, leaves , gets the next 4 weeks off with pay...

[James T Mather]

- Usually withOUT pay.

[ac/jc]

For a producer, an experienced DP can overcome a "new" or "green" director. It can be a wise investment. That is why it's very hard for a newbie DP or 1st AD for that matter to get a break because producers want to be assured of results and on-time, on-budget. If your track record is merely a $100K reel where you dictated the pace and shots and there was no pressure it doesn't show that you can motivate a crew or work a set when everything has stalled.

$100K on a reel is too much investment. You could get away with a lot less $$ and still put out a nice reel. Then you have to get people to watch it. A ton of reels go unseen.

Another option since you have a good paying job is to work in the camera department on some time off. Work under some experienced DP's in some trying situations and see if it's for you. It's not all about making pretty pictures sometimes.

[Jason Ing]

i think part of that 100k budget includes buying the red package, correct?

[Stephen Williams]

i think part of that 100k budget includes buying the red package, correct?

Hi,

I would have thought if you were shooting a $100,000 commercial show reel then film would probably be the medium of choice.

Stephen

[Russ McDonald]

I thought I would chime in here, take your 100,000 and find a script. One that has the elements that will showcase what you can do as DP. be selective and take your time.

Find a hungry Director with talent give him the break, shoot his film. Now you have a film that you have a real equity stake in. If I had your money, this is what I would do.

First. I would buy a years worth of insurance that would allow me to rent anything I wanted as far as Grip and Camera gear.

I would buy a basic Red package, and one lens that 18-85 would do nicely.
then I would buy a moderately supped up Mac so I could post the film.

Then I would put the rest away to market the film at a couple festivals.

There are filmmakers that have money just sitting in the wings, if they could get that first investor the rest would fall in line, that would take a dream and turn it into a green light picture. You have the money and the gear you have the power. It's a win win for you and them, and the odds are good you'll double your Money. Support your artist side, with what I can see is a sharp business side.

[Jason Ing]

Hi,

I would have thought if you were shooting a $100,000 commercial show reel then film would probably be the medium of choice.

Stephen

i assumed it since this is the reduser forum. and the price tag makes a little more sense and not so extravagent for a show reel if you include red plus other stuff.

[Stephen Williams]

i assumed it since this is the reduser forum. and the price tag makes a little more sense and not so extravagent for a show reel if you include red plus other stuff.

Hi,

$10,000 a day DOP's don't very often have equipment, in any case they would charge for it above their day rate. The vast majority of high end commercials are shot on film usually with an Arri 435, if one really wants to get into that league shooting a cheaper more affordable format is probably not the way to go. The people you want to impress are not looking to save money, if they were they would take a DOP charging $3,000 or less!

Stephen

[DanWood]

So, my plan is to invest a min of $50k -$100k wisely in a demo using the red entirely of course. I would however only do this if I had a pretty good chance I could charge 10k/day as a DP. Of course I understand even after my 100k reel investment I need to get some big jobs under my belt first. Perhaps 15-25 commercials?
Is this realistic or am i living a dream?
Also I have heard some of these ASC guys can charge 30k per day for commercials. Is this true?

I would say, $500/day is more realistic.
If you wanrt to work on a low budget feature film, for experience, e-mail me mathew@consultant.com

[laguun]

Hi,
$10,000 a day DOP's don't very often have equipment, in any case they would charge for it above their day rate.

Many of the $$.$$$ dps i know, and/or work with together, do own lots of gear (including post). In fact, some even have their own production companies. This is especially true for automobile commercials and promos.



The vast majority of high end commercials are shot on film usually with an Arri 435, if one really wants to get into that league shooting a cheaper more affordable format is probably not the way to go.

my experience with $$$.$$$ and $.$$$.$$$ budget commercials is different.



The people you want to impress are not looking to save money, if they were they would take a DOP charging $3,000 or less!
Stephen
Hm, while there are money-doesnt-matter jobs, they have become quite rarer in the last 15 years, espc. since & after 9/11.

Many top-end money-waster companies and networks went bankrupt and were bought by more cost efficient competitors. And i am pretty certain that the buyers i know from the automotive industry in germany would rather smile if they read that they spend money to "impress people".

In fact many buyers today spend $$.$$$ for production security, for quick turnarounds, splendid service etc. Many car manufacturers also try the short route, cutting the agency out for many films (trade shows etc).

I however agree that the types of job you describe is absolutely existing still and has its niches. But profit became -much- more important meanwhile, and many large brands (deutsche bank, masterfoods (aka catsan etc), daimler, nike, to name a few from the usual suspect industries) are certainly neither impressed by $$.$$$ figures nor do they like to cut them off their profits.

And red does and will see its use in top-commercials, several examples can already found in the footage forum here.

However, to be completly honest - i prefer to stay away from the advertising world. Its an interesting playfield, but i honestly dislike many of the archetypes... "truth in advertising" is a nice short to sum up several of them :)

if you dont know it: HIGHLY recommended:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Go_VtqtxCHY

[Joe D'Arcy]

Each to their own. There are no certainties. Whether it means throwing out $100K or doing it all for free, it all entails risk and luck. My personal path would be to follow adobeone konobis' suggestion. Given that you are knowingly taking the risk on a living project and not on a contrived reel.

[Stephen Williams]

my experience with $$$.$$$ and $.$$$.$$$ budget commercials is different.




Hi,

You're saying most high end commercials are shot on video then?

Stephen

[M Most]

Hi,

You're saying most high end commercials are shot on video then?



I don't know about Europe and other world markets, but in the US, that is most definitely not the case.

[laguun]

Hi,

You're saying most high end commercials are shot on video then?

Stephen

No.
Its any format today.
DV, S16, HDCAM, 35mm, Nikon & Canon DSLRs on MoCos, and yes, even mobile phone cameras. Anything which makes sense.

Its about creativity and success today.
Not about the format. That is secondary.

In the PAL/NTSC TV space 30sek+reminder shortforms we still get most stuff on 35 (however less every year).
image & corp we get more HDCAM than 35mm, especially for these ($).$$$.$$$ large multi-screen venues. In fact -all- trade shows projects / digital signage we have done in the recent 5 years were HDCAM.
For virals we see everything.

HDCAM originated commercial TV-Stuff i personally did have a role in in the recent years was FIFA, SIEMENS, Anna Netrebko, City of Berlin, NIKE, FERRERO, DAIMLER, ADDIDAS to name a few international A-Brands.

Finally, it highly depends on your location.
Here in Berlin, the industry aims to be recognized to offer excellent pricing, highly talented and qualified craft, with a relaxed and very quick turnaround and implementing cost advantages for the producers - and certainly not by trying to impress people with extremely high wages.
This might be one of the reasons why this area gets more and more top-class work, from A-budget fullfeature to international campaign.

Finally:
While there are almost endless long list of excellent 35mm, its rare to get world-top-class red DPs yet.
So i certainly would recommend to -emphasize- that heavily sought after qualification. Remember, you already find Apple, Ford etc shooting commercials on RED, with footage posted here on reduser, and there are -few- car or phone specialist who master red, many who know 35 - yet.

I think RED will do the same to the TV agency world what the DSLRs done to the printcampaign agency world.
Why loose time in the lab, why risk an wrong exposure due to stock/lab issues, (just recently Tom Cruise lost -days- of shooting as Kodak/Arri destroyed his footage) etc. Time and turnaround are critical factors in many areas of agency work, especially with product launches, and films slow workflow is a problem for this kind of work. Since a (i wont tell who, but one of germanys 3 largest) lab screwed us 6 reels of original negative 35mm stock in 2000 for a mercedes SL spot, i am became pretty immune to any "35mm is it for commercial" discussion. wishful thinking imho.

[Stephen Williams]

No.
Its any format today.
DV, S16, HDCAM, 35mm, Nikon & Canon DSLRs on MoCos, and yes, even mobile phone cameras. Anything which makes sense.

Its about creativity and success today.
Not about the format. That is secondary.



Hi,

Are you talking about commercials where the DP is earning $10,000 a day, or just generally?

Stephen

[David Mullen ASC]

Film is not particularly prone to be ruined any more than a digital shoot has problems that make footage unusable. Mistakes happen, but on average, film is pretty reliable or else insurance companies wouldn't let people use it. I shot about a million feet of film on "Big Love" and had a technical problem on one shot in the course of seven months of shooting, and even the one shot ruined had an alternative take that was fine.

On my current feature, we tested a new digital camera (won't say which one) for some specialty shots alongside a film camera... and now we have to schedule a reshoot for the digital test because there is something wrong with the footage that can't be fixed in post (a pattern problem that is visible in the blacks). And this is after I assured the studio that it was safe to shoot some of the movie digitally on this camera. Luckily it was only a test.

On the other hand, I heard yesterday that a studio division has also been exploring the idea of requiring that their medium and small budget projects shoot entirely digitally, not for reliability, just for the cost reasons, which is a new trend -- however, they are picky about which digital camera systems you propose to them (they feel comfortable with the Genesis, for example). But so far, half the producers and directors that are making movies for the studio have argued successfully to let them shoot on film instead.

But I don't really buy the notion that film is too unreliable to shoot, nor that mistakes never happen with digital in comparison. As long as movies are made by human beings using machines, there will be occasional problems.

Shooting major commercials on film in the U.S. is not "wishful thinking" it's standard operating procedure these days.

Personally, I think the everyday fear of sending your film to the lab will be replaced someday by the everyday fear of dumping the contents of your on-camera recorders to LTO tapes and hard drives and hoping seven months in the future or so when you do the D.I. that all the footage is retrievable and convertible from RAW to RGB...

[Stephen Williams]

Shooting major commercials on film in the U.S. is not "wishful thinking" it's standard operating procedure these days.

Hi David,

Than you for confirming that.

Stephen

[David Mullen ASC]

Obviously there are smaller commercials and local spots in the U.S., most of which have gone over to shooting digitally. Just as most content for TV is shot digitally... yet most major network and cable dramatic TV shows in the U.S. are shot on film.

[laguun]

Hi,

Are you talking about commercials where the DP is earning $10,000 a day, or just generally?

Stephen

any.

for TV-commercials most high earning DP i met or work with use with 35mm.
for tradeshow/fair/product launch most high earning DPi i met or work with use with HDCAM/video
for the hip-"director" genre, where DP i secondary, i see them using anything.

creativity first, format second. and certain formats are suited better for special purposes than others. car shooting, as example, was not very good with the low framerates of the 1st generation hdcams, not with red its interesting. Or the venue we are doing right now in 8K (or 8*1920*1080, to be precise) is better suited with red than any other format etc.
many agencies here understand these things meanwhile.

however, as i mentioned, your mileage will vary depending on your local circumstances, i just can comment on berlin and several parts of germany.

[laguun]

Personally, I think the everyday fear of sending your film to the lab will be replaced someday by the everyday fear of dumping the contents of your on-camera recorders to LTO tapes and hard drives and hoping seven months in the future or so when you do the D.I. that all the footage is retrievable and convertible from RAW to RGB...

Already here since 2002... however -perfect- backups and -perfect- on set monitoring are instruments one should use to overcome such problems. Also they help to avoid the mentioned mistakes which forced you to improvise, as they do cost time and money - check on set and backup is paramount for us.

[ac/jc]

Finally:
While there are almost endless long list of excellent 35mm, its rare to get world-top-class red DPs yet.
So i certainly would recommend to -emphasize- that heavily sought after qualification. Remember, you already find Apple, Ford etc shooting commercials on RED, with footage posted here on reduser, and there are -few- car or phone specialist who master red, many who know 35 - yet.
.

What are the obstacles that would prevent a "world class DP" versed in 35mm from transferring his skills, (ie: compositon, framing, lighting, mood, running and organizing a large crew/set, working with the director.) to the Red camera? Is there a learning curve, etc? New tools are always showing up and I think any artist will treat it as a new paintbrush and implement the use into their toolbox. I know that so far here in Canada, there are a couple rental houses that will have red packages available, so work won't be limited to owner/operators for long, it will become a "proper tool for the proper job" situation much like happened with HDCAM. Also, what is "red qualification" ?

[David Mullen ASC]

Either a DP is good at what they do (making images) or they aren't -- the particular piece of equipment used is secondary, though of course you have to learn how to use it. But there are no "Red DP's" anymore than there are "Kodak DP's" versus "Fuji DP's" versus "HDCAM DP's" versus "DVCPRO HD DP's" versus "HDCAM-SR DP's" versus "Viper DP's" versus "Phantom DP's" -- either you are a good DP or you aren't.

Obviously we are at too early a stage for there to be a high experience level using the RED camera for many top industry cinematographers. It took years for many cinematographers to do projects on HDCAM, for example.

But the line between people who shoot digitally and those who shoot on film has been blurring for a decade now. For most of us in the middle range, and for those up and coming, it's inevitable that we have to learn to use both technologies and all the new ones that come along.

[Greg M]

The typical rate for a DP on a 35mm commercial shoot in the U.S. ranges from $3,500/day to $15,000/day. Obviously you get what you pay for, but from my experience you can still find many great DP's in the $3-5k range. Just finished a job w/ an outstanding DP who is at the upper end of the pay scale and he has no shortage of work.

[ac/jc]

Either a DP is good at what they do (making images) or they aren't -- the particular piece of equipment used is secondary, though of course you have to learn how to use it. But there are no "Red DP's" anymore than there are "Kodak DP's" versus "Fuji DP's" versus "HDCAM DP's" versus "DVCPRO HD DP's" versus "HDCAM-SR DP's" versus "Viper DP's" versus "Phantom DP's" -- either you are a good DP or you aren't.



Thank you David, you made the point I was getting at much more clearly. My typing never emphasizes my tone of voice.

The Red camera will be welcomed into the fold of technology available to every DP at some point. I've strayed way off the topic of this thread.

[laguun]

guys, i agree with mmost what was written in the posts.

please keep in mind that it wasnt -me- who recommended to shoot everything in one format.

s. w. did that. I said that creativity first, format second as general methodolgy has arrived also in the commercials business and i dont have any shortage of willig film/mchanical cam dps here, but indeed one of red/digital dps. Your locaal producers POV might vary.

[J.R. Hud]

Either a DP is good at what they do (making images) or they aren't -- the particular piece of equipment used is secondary, though of course you have to learn how to use it. But there are no "Red DP's" anymore than there are "Kodak DP's" versus "Fuji DP's" versus "HDCAM DP's" versus "DVCPRO HD DP's" versus "HDCAM-SR DP's" versus "Viper DP's" versus "Phantom DP's" -- either you are a good DP or you aren't.

Obviously we are at too early a stage for there to be a high experience level using the RED camera for many top industry cinematographers. It took years for many cinematographers to do projects on HDCAM, for example.

But the line between people who shoot digitally and those who shoot on film has been blurring for a decade now. For most of us in the middle range, and for those up and coming, it's inevitable that we have to learn to use both technologies and all the new ones that come along.


I have always said, that Janusz could take a candle, a firefly and some tinfoil and create a masterpiece while others could screw it up with a entire grip truck.

[Stephen Williams]

[QUOTE=laguun;

please keep in mind that it wasnt -me- who recommended to shoot everything in one format.

s. w. did that. y.[/QUOTE]

Hi Laguun,

When? I was never speaking about everything!

Stephen

[chuckt]

Personally, I think the everyday fear of sending your film to the lab will be replaced someday by the everyday fear of dumping the contents of your on-camera recorders to LTO tapes and hard drives and hoping seven months in the future or so when you do the D.I. that all the footage is retrievable and convertible from RAW to RGB...

Well said. I have heard of film cans surviving office fires and floods, lost in wilderness and buried under snow. Film is pretty resiliant. Film is self archiving. I have lost many a reels of unreplaceable digital content by disk crash and computer malfunction and electrical surges and magnetic fields. Considering the cost of proper archiving for 100 years, the cost of digital files is astronomical. I can pick up a film can that was forgotten in the shelves of a defunct studio 100 years ago and retrieve the movie.

The cost of making the film is also highly exaggerated. The poorest countries in the world do not make many movies. When they do, they make it in film. Cheap, used Arri cameras and cheap film stock are available all over the world. A pair of scissors and some scotch tape would be enough to edit film. An ancient carbon arc projector or a hand cranked viewer can display film even in the middle of jungle.

Sorry for candidly talking about film. I know this forum is only for praising RED and worshipping Jim. RED has its place. By 2013 KODAK or FUJI won't be making film any more. They both have started shutting down their manufacturing facilities. KODAK may go under first. Both companies are looking for alternate businesses for survival. So far RED is the fastest growing camera comapny in the world. At this rate, there will be a 'RED in every garage, and FCP on every desktop' by end of this year. KODAK's projection of 'end-of-film' may come sooner than 2013 !

[Paul Hazlett]

what you say is true now, with the current state of digital tachnology,
but by 2013 we may have a high speed flash drive type units that hold 100
gbs of media on non-volital sticks that can be plugged into the cheap laptop
of the future.

As the rest of technology catches up with Red we will see better archiving
system.

I hope

[laguun]

Sorry for candidly talking about film. I know this forum is only for praising RED and worshipping Jim. RED has its place. By 2013 KODAK or FUJI won't be making film any more. They both have started shutting down their manufacturing facilities. KODAK's projection of 'end-of-film' may come sooner than 2013 !
"Soon, I'm not going to be answering questions about film because I won't know. It will be too small for me to get involved."
Antonio Perez, CEO Kodak
source: FT.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/36d7f414-8e10-11da-8fda-0000779e2340.html

[laguun]

Hi Laguun,
When? I was never speaking about everything!
Stephen

Hi,
I would have thought if you were shooting a $100,000 commercial show reel then film would probably be the medium of choice.
Stephen

Ok, probably misunderstood the above post then.

[Jamie Metzger]

You should spend half of that $100,000 on film school. And not because you need the education, but because you can have access to free labor, and free equipment, and then you can shoot many projects with high production value, instead of one really expensive one.

[Chris Nuzzaco]

100K would let you easily shoot at least 10 really nice, high quality short films if you approach writing a script from a DP/real world logistics side of things angle.

[Jason Sinclair]

or take a year off and do as many low budget features as possible for other people... That way you can say i have done 3 features. If you look for interesting scripts who knows, you may hit one of those rare winners and land in tinseltown.

[Jonas Nyström]

I boost my earnings with taking care of pre production, script development, and post production. I guess i earn 4-5 times more then if I only sold production days. And I think it's fun. Happy days!

[Tail Ends]

From a producer/director's point of view, you are all missing a couple of important issues. Aside from left brain skill and right brained talent, you need to be likeable and have the respect of other crew members. And you need to have the social graces and intelligence to be able to communicate with clients and actors. Self confidence allows you to do some salesmanship or self promotion, but a lot of people out there simply can't do any of that.

As for compensation, when you're younger, you need to sacrifice today to live better tomorrow. Those good looking gals that work at Sotheby's, Christie's and most of the fashion houses start out as trainees and get paid ZERO. What's more, there is a waiting list for those jobs. Talent agencies have a slew of people wanting to break in doing grunt work and get paid near ZERO. I started off as a trainee earning $500 per month! The international company I worked for philosophy's was to just pay you enough for gas and very modest living. At the end of six months, you were out or you were earning five figures a month plus. It was the best decision I ever made.

The point of all this is that there are always opportunities out there if you hustle and make doing a good job take priority over pay. Pay will follow if you show that you know how to sacrifice a bit and that you show you know how to follow instructions, have a good work ethic, be a team player and be enjoyable to be around. Just putting in the hours and clocking out doesn't gain much attention from decision makers. It's what you do in those hours that count. Are you adding value to the project or just waiting for the next food break? What have you done today that would make someone like me want you back tomorrow? Work with that thought and you'll be getting your bucks, but more importantly, the respect of those who pay your wages. This is not always easy under the various guild rules, but always try.

That might sound like preaching, but it's true.

Tail Ends

[Nova Invicta]

We have seen a gradual change from film first in 16mm now in 35mm towards digital. The shows shooting digitally shoot on either 2/3rds or 35mm sensor cameras with Red making respectable inroads in 2008. One size however doesnt fit all as each medium still has its plus & minus points take for instance high speed the Phantom HD camera has made big dents in the photosonics arena and the likes of D-20/21, Genesis or Red would not have been suitable. The new Kodak stocks Vision 3 has rejuvienated the film die-hard cameramen so its horses for courses.
DPs typically earn £ 1-3K as jobbing cameramen per day on commercials with high end DPs going higher on bigger jobs.
Be warned however that just as Red cameras are cheaper the agencies & production companies are expecting the associated labor to be equally cheaper!

[Christoffer Glans]

Either a DP is good at what they do (making images) or they aren't -- the particular piece of equipment used is secondary, though of course you have to learn how to use it. But there are no "Red DP's" anymore than there are "Kodak DP's" versus "Fuji DP's" versus "HDCAM DP's" versus "DVCPRO HD DP's" versus "HDCAM-SR DP's" versus "Viper DP's" versus "Phantom DP's" -- either you are a good DP or you aren't.


And when do I know that? I have no DP experience with film (the format) only prosumer cameras with adapters. Still I have been praised for my images I've accomplished with it and people say I have "the eye" and "talent" for it.
I've done some pure DP works for theatre plays (:wink: ) (scenes that are projected in between and during the play) which has confirmed that I can earn money through my work with images and it is my primary income (though barely enough to live by).
I have been working as a still photographer on a few portrait sessions and I've did som freework for bigger names in the industry just to get contacts.

Still, I have no idea if I'm any good at it. I learn more each time I worked and I'm no way near the "thousands of project experience" that can give the producer the confidence to let me have total artistic freedom and a paycheck that is enough to pay the daily lunch.

What happens next is that I get a chance to work with minimal pay as the editor for a feature film... an area that I seem to have talent for but something I haven't really focused on as much as my cinematography, screenwriting and directing. Life has it's weird turn of events, I make a shortfilm, people like the cinematography but I get the prizes in editing and a chance to work on a feature film as one...

I'm starting up my own freelance company to work as a DP, director, editor or all that in a package whatever the customer likes. I'm sure I will do alot of industry videos and commercials for companies with minimal budget but am I ready to say: "Hey, here I am! A fresh green talanted DP at you service with alot of experience with prosumer 35mm-adapter but eager to work with bigger production bucks and crewmembers older and more experienced then me"?

I know that as artists you evolve until the day you die unless your name is Uwe Boll. But when am I ready to work as a DP and present myself as one to producers and such?

Even though my camera experience is limited in the area of technology, I know or at least have been told that I have an eye for lightning and images...
Is that enough? Who will judge? By what when each project is it's own?

Major line or question for the self and others: when do I know when I am ready? When do I know when I have the skills required?
Or is everything based upon jumping without a safenet and hopefully fall into the pipe that doesn't have the hungry sharks in them...?

I have one feet on each side: One on the side of amateur filmmaking and one on the professional side making a living by it... then the toes of the latter foot is touching the world of the really big league of filmmaking.

With my lack of format experience am I still experienced enough to work as a DP based on my extensive work with the format I have, my studies in the field and my own developed theories and philosophy of cinematography?


Sorry if I made this post into a bit of a personal journey, but I think the general question is how I and others like me know that we are ready to ask for a certain paycheck and get the job done.

[David Mullen ASC]

Most people don't start at the top anyway, especially DP's, so you'll have plenty of opportunities to shoot and gain confidence and experience. There really isn't a hard line where you think you've a "real DP". I've shot over thirty features and am now in the ASC... and I still ask my wife if she thinks what I shot "looks like a real movie" or not. I feel like a lifelong student.

You try and get work which is one small step beyond your abilities so you'll have a chance to grow and learn. You don't just want to do what you've already mastered before, you want a challenge. The trick is getting a producer to take a chance on you.

[conrad gaunt]

That sounds more rational.

Then blow the rest on coke and hookers.

or

Play the lens market with your spare capital. Buy and sell (4 profit of course). The lenses WILL need testing on your R1 of course for quality assurance, post some images taken with each lens when selling, and buy carefully!

[Daniel Browning]

I've shot over thirty features and am now in the ASC... and I still ask my wife if she thinks what I shot "looks like a real movie" or not. I feel like a lifelong student.

That made me laugh! I'll try to remember that when I'm in the theater watching your next feature film. :) It's the type of attitude that improves more and faster than its opposite. Good advice for any endeavor.

[RedRay]

Wow 10k a day? Is that US dollars? Top commercial DPs here in Asia earn about 1k to 2k a day only. Some may have earned 3k tops but that's rare. Cost of living here is cheaper of course. And since we have smaller markets, hence we have smaller industries and intense competition, so very few actually get a break. On the other hand, the first world has developed so much that there are so many people now who want/are learning to be DPs/filmmakers so despite having bigger industries and markets, there are also just too many competing to get positions.