Television advertisements advice

salacious said:

personally in my opinion if i was a businessman and someone wanted to do a commercial for me and they said that money wasnt a priority for them, then I wouldnt want them working for me, because:

1.money is what people live on, if you are claiming you dont need this then to me you dont need to live.

2. in my opinion your less hungry than someone who wants £1000 of my cash to produce something for me they will do an advert to please the client,, i mean if your gonna do it for free how can they take you seriously? you should be saying that money is very motivational for you. and that your willing to do what it takes to get that DOE!!!

Click to expand...

There is a difference between saying you don't need money and money isn't your top priority. Also, you are making the assumption that the person doesn't have other sources of income (like other projects). It's very common in this industry to take on lower paying gigs that look like fun because many times the regular gigs can be a grind or maybe you just need a change of pace to keep from getting burned out. Of course you need to be working enough at your full rate to be financially able to take on the lower paying gigs.

There's work that feeds your stomach and work that feeds your soul. If you are lucky they are one in the same.

WRP said:

And if a network wants that you need a mac pro with a capture card to get SDI out. And the decks you either need to rent or spend $40K on. Or you need to bring to a finishing house to get printed to tape and that isn't cheap.

Click to expand...

Or any Mac that has Thunderbolt or an ExpressCard slot.

Of course if going out to tape is a rare thing it's well worth the money to just take the finished QT to a post house and have them do it, IMO (just bring your own blank tapes so you don't pay their mark up).


Lethal

LethalWolfe said:

Of course if going out to tape is a rare thing it's well worth the money to just take the finished QT to a post house and have them do it, IMO (just bring your own blank tapes so you don't pay their mark up).

Lethal

Click to expand...

Yeah, I usually deliver uncompressed on a drive with tapes and have them do it. Luckily they are right down the street. I did rent a deck once for a massive amount of archiving but f-that, never again... that thing was a tank!

LethalWolfe said:

There is a difference between saying you don't need money and money isn't your top priority. Also, you are making the assumption that the person doesn't have other sources of income (like other projects). It's very common in this industry to take on lower paying gigs that look like fun because many times the regular gigs can be a grind or maybe you just need a change of pace to keep from getting burned out. Of course you need to be working enough at your full rate to be financially able to take on the lower paying gigs.

There's work that feeds your stomach and work that feeds your soul. If you are lucky they are one in the same.



Or any Mac that has Thunderbolt or an ExpressCard slot.

Of course if going out to tape is a rare thing it's well worth the money to just take the finished QT to a post house and have them do it, IMO (just bring your own blank tapes so you don't pay their mark up).


Lethal

Click to expand...

ok i see your point but also perhaps you misunderstood me,

il give an example of the boys scenario and il pretend im a big time company seeking advertisements.. and note that i have the money to spend and i have two clients infront of me..

one is young no experience by that i mean none professionaly, and has no professional standard equipment and quite possibly could not know what hes doing.

the other is a professional has done a few media projects and has the equipment for the job.

young one is offering to do it for free, i assume that he must have income as he is offering it for free, or hes trying to impress me

professional is offering to do it for £1000, i assume that he must do this for a living.

in my opinion from a business perspective, i am to go with whoever offers me the best value, and who will offer me the most satisfaction.

so do i go with a young guy with no experience for free

or do i go with someone who knows what they are doing and is charging me a standard price and from his reputation i know will deliver me a acceptable format.

i think 9/10 would pick the professional, im all for supporting new talent, but if im not a media company and im wanting a commerical then il go with the professional, however if im not particularly seeking for a commercial and im being offered one, then yes i would go with the free option.

^^^And no professional is going to charge a $1000 for creating a commercial. That's a day of shooting, equipment fees, a day at least of editing, a round of revisions at least, music licensing, etc, etc. You can't get a good commercial shot for anything under $5G at the absolute bare minimum from an amateur. I create 3 minute insight videos and charge $25k with zero shooting cost. They give me the content. This is for scripting time, editing time, art card design, etc.

salacious said:

ok i see your point but also perhaps you misunderstood me,
.
.
.
i think 9/10 would pick the professional, im all for supporting new talent, but if im not a media company and im wanting a commerical then il go with the professional, however if im not particularly seeking for a commercial and im being offered one, then yes i would go with the free option.

Click to expand...

This is different scenario though than what you posted previously. The first scenario was about paid vs pro bono and this one is about experience vs no experience.

WRP said:

^^^And no professional is going to charge a $1000 for creating a commercial.

Click to expand...

I agree, but I think he's just tossing out $1000 as an arbitrary number for the sake of argument.


Lethal

Just throwing an idea out here. Is there any wisdom in having this young man create a dummy commercial or two using AE (which he says he uses) and stock footage? Videoblocks dot com has a bunch of free clips. The PhotoJPEG codec used by a lot of the clips kinda sucks, but free is good. He'd be out the price of a good VO, but that beats the price of renting, let alone buying, the production gear he might need. Just an idea.

----------

jpine said:

Just throwing an idea out here. Is there any wisdom in having this young man create a dummy commercial or two using AE (which he says he uses) and stock footage? Videoblocks dot com has a bunch of free clips. The PhotoJPEG codec used by a lot of the clips kinda sucks, but free is good. He'd be out the price of a good VO, but that beats the price of renting, let alone buying, the production gear he might need. Just an idea.

Click to expand...

I forgot to add another market he could try would be web commercials rather than worrying about broadcast.

Ricky Smith said:

There's a reason those commercials look like crap and those ones easily paid 10k+ for that "crap" commercial.

Click to expand...

What's the reason(s) you are talking about?
I'm sincerely interested...

jpine said:

Just throwing an idea out here. Is there any wisdom in having this young man create a dummy commercial or two using AE (which he says he uses) and stock footage? Videoblocks dot com has a bunch of free clips. The PhotoJPEG codec used by a lot of the clips kinda sucks, but free is good. He'd be out the price of a good VO, but that beats the price of renting, let alone buying, the production gear he might need. Just an idea.

Click to expand...

Not in my opinion. Using stock only proves he can edit a story together. It doesn't prove he can concept, storyboard, shoot, light, direct, do all the post, etc. The editing, while extremely important, is not the only link in the chain. If he gets garbage it doesn't matter how good he edits it. Garbage in, garbage out.