Asked to film for another company

[Chris Harding]

Hey Steve

Bring it on!! Our photo packages are a lot cheaper combined with video as we are already there so it would make interesting reading!!

Sorry to jump topics but Roger? I have our new season first wedding rehearsal tomorrow evening and I'll zap some 4K and 1080 footage inside the Church and maybe ask you 100 questions but not on this thread!!

Chris

[Steve Burkett]

The merits on joint / non joint have been discussed at length already. There is little more to say. However I did laugh at Roger feeling that this guy was lowering the value of video by offering £349 for 4 hours work, when no doubt he's undercutting other Photographers with a full days Photography for perhaps a similar amount. Yes you can say the cost is divided with video, but a low fee is a low fee and still undercuts others prices whether justified or not. I'm sure this guy could object to Videographers offering full day fees and nothing else to ensure they get booked for their top prices whilst ignoring those couples who may not want a full days filming but have no choice if they want some kind of video, and justify his price plan.

Now I'm not defending the guy or his attitude. I think his business model is unsustainable in the long run. However at least he's not offering that fee for a days filming, which I'm sure others do.

And yes £160 for what would take up much of your day seems an un-tempting offer. If offered to me, I would make clear that the 4 hours includes setup and departure. If more was required then the job is 5 hours. Simple as that. The moment I arrive at the venue, I'm working in my eyes and charge for it. Unless the guy is asking for 4 hours continuous filming, those 4 hours will include some setup and down time. If I take a loo break, do I have to stop the clock and add 2 minutes to the end time. Am I not able to attach a single camera to a tripod during those 4 hours or must this all be done before I start work. Setting up gear is a continuous process throughout the day, not something you do an hour before the commencement of filming.

I was booked for 4 hours by one couple for February this year, I can assure you I didn't film continuously for 4 hours nor did I need to or was expected to. I arrived 1 hour before the Ceremony and left as the couple entered the Reception for their meal. Setup was included in those 4 hours for the Ceremony, but in that first hour I still got venue shots and guest arrivals enough for a 4 minute intro piece, plus successfully set up 4 cameras and audio recorders for the Ceremony.

By all means turn the job down as you have better things to do, turn it down because the hours are so small and the end fee too low, turn it down because it would be a nightmare to park, or you have a lot of editing, but all this talk of setup time, SD cards download, shower time, getting dressed and it seems the enormous time spent charging batteries is just over justifying a reason to refuse.

[Roger Gunkel]

I think my reasons for turning down the work are perfectly justified and you are entitled to have your own opinion on it as are others reading this thread.

As regards the joint photo/video package, already discussed as you said, but I am not subcontracting someone else at low rates and as Chris said it is not offering a cheap photo package, it is a different way to working to both photographers and videographers based on already being there. There are also photographers in this region offering photo packages for the same price and less than my add on cost but how that is possible I have no idea.

If anybody would rather have a totally independent photographer whose work they like, I have no problem working with them. Of course, every photographer out there can also add video onto what they offer if they have the skills required :-)

Roger

[Roger Gunkel]

Perhaps at this stage I should also add that if anyone wants to book our photo package without the video, we will be offering a standalone photo package next year for the same cost as our stand alone video package.

Roger

[Steve Burkett]

Actually your reason for turning the guy down on the basis of not giving your skills and experience to a competitor was a good enough argument. I'm not criticising your refusal, just some of the silly stuff being made to support it. Battery charge and Shower time indeed. If I told someone I was unable to do the job as the x number of hours didn't factor in my shower and getting dressed time, I'd be laughed at.

As per joint packages Roger, I should stress I'm not saying you're undervaluing your work. Joint packages should be cheaper for so many reasons. However it can have an impact on photographers prices just as this guy is setting a price that as you say has an impact on other videographers. Bare in mind it's £349 for 4 hours filming, not for the day. If it was £1047 for 12 hours filming, would you suggest he was damaging the video business. Just as in your case, it's a different type of package. I offer a Ceremony only package but how many couples take it, approx 1-2% of them.

You keep saying its a low rate, no it's not. £40 an hour is a good rate, its just a low volume of hours. Theres a difference. Okay the guy behaved like a prick and took a pop shot when you said no, but suggestions he regularly subcontracts and even that the editing is subcontracted too as one person here put forward, is just pure speculation. He asked you to cover a Wedding and somehow he's the great Videographer ogre out to exploit poor innocent Brides. Frankly if a couple pay for 4 hours, they can't value a Wedding video that much to care who the hell films it.

[Roger Gunkel]

Hi Steve, actually it wasn't me who mentioned anything about getting showered, dressed or having breakfast, it was Chris so you can have a go at him (sorry Chris) :-)

I did refer to time involved in preparing equipment and getting ready, which for me would include checking all batteries and charging as necessary, (I never charge them and leave them unless the next job is already booked a couple of days away), checking the cameras have fresh cards, printing the licence if it is a church, making sure the remote controls are all working and the general things that I do before every shoot to minimise the risk. I also allow enough time for the car not starting, unexpected diversions etc, because if I don't do all those things, previous experience tells me that something will go wrong. Probably different to how you work, but for me, following a tried and tested routine is essential for peace of mind.

Roger

[Steve Burkett]

This time of year, batteries are charged after every shoot. I'm never more than 4 days away from another bit of filming. Batteries hold their charge very well. Same with AA batteries and GoPro batteries. I load SD Cards into the cameras, clean lenses and ensure audio recorders are working. Licenses are downloaded on my phone - any objections and I just tell them I work paperless. Mostly they're emailed before the day.

Long journeys I allow more time, but shorter 20-30 minutes I allow approx 10-15 minutes extra. That goes up to an hour or more for 1-2 hour drives. However this is my schedule for my own Weddings. For a 4 hour shoot like this, I'd be less cautious and certainly not for £160.

Basically my kit is made ready for the next shoot the morning after the last one. I then do a check the night before, so I don't have to think about it when I wake up the next day.

[Roger Gunkel]

Just on your point Steve that I am speculating that he subcontracts regularly. Yes I am you are quite correct, but as this booking was 150 miles from him and he stated that he books all over the country, I think it highly unlikely that he would normally make a 300 mile or more round journey to film and edit a 4 hour wedding shoot for £349 if he can pay someone locally to film it.

Contrary to what you think I feel, I don't mind anybody offering a cheaper wedding video than me, but when they talk about using BBC broadcast quality equipment, personal pre wedding meetings, a minimum of two cameras and confidence in the years of experience of the business, I find myself questioning what people think they are going to get for £349 from a company that may be 100s of miles from them. When I get a call such as I did, it makes me even more concerned. Sure his top priced packages probably include all that, but people will make assumptions based on what they see, not what they don't see.

So many of the couple's that I see haven't a clue about wedding video, what they get or what it costs and it is easy for them to buy into a glossy promotion. Perhaps I am just too concerned about other people and should let people make their own mistakes. I mentioned in another thread a few months ago that a local photographer had strongly recommended me to a client of his that wanted a video. He had worked with me many times and even booked me to film his own wedding. The couple decided to book someone else simply because they were £100 cheaper and booked on line after seeing some examples on his website. He was also over 150 miles away. What they got was a guy with one hand held camera who filmed bits of the day, didn't film the speeches at all including their 8 year old son making a speech that had everybody in tears. The finished video was the length of one short song that he had picked and the couple were absolutely devastated. They had thought that the highlights on his website were just short examples, but the full length video that they expected was £1000 more and they were mislead by the glossy site. As far as I know it could even have been the same company that contacted me.

Roger

[Roger Gunkel]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

This time of year, batteries are charged after every shoot. I'm never more than 4 days away from another bit of filming. Batteries hold their charge very well. Same with AA batteries and GoPro batteries. I load SD Cards into the cameras, clean lenses and ensure audio recorders are working. Licenses are downloaded on my phone - any objections and I just tell them I work paperless. Mostly they're emailed before the day.

Long journeys I allow more time, but shorter 20-30 minutes I allow approx 10-15 minutes extra. That goes up to an hour or more for 1-2 hour drives. However this is my schedule for my own Weddings. For a 4 hour shoot like this, I'd be less cautious and certainly not for £160.

Basically my kit is made ready for the next shoot the morning after the last one. I then do a check the night before, so I don't have to think about it when I wake up the next day.

OK Steve your preparations are very similar to mine, but the point is you still do them, so if the next shoot is for a short time minimal fee, you have still spent the same amount of time doing the preparations, and you still have to do them when you get home again. Whichever way you look at it, that time still needs to be accounted for.

How about we call it a draw, as we are really getting into hair splitting over differing viewpoints. Interesting but becoming a bit pointless :-)

Roger

[Steve Burkett]

I agree it's accountable, but with my gear, it's accountable to my Business in general rather than to a particular shoot. I've just been repairing my jib; which job pays for that time. I don't consider prep work to be so great as to warrant refusal of a small job, but then as I take jobs in London where my combined travel can be greater than the time filming, perhaps my perspective is somewhat warped.

[George Kilroy]

With the experience and expertise you have Roger I cannot understand what your purpose was in starting this topic. In my time I had all sorts of calls offering work I didn't want or couldn't do, I had numerous calls claiming that I'd get more work or higher positioning on google. These call came and I follow up or ignore them. I can't understand why that particular one got you so worked up. With over 25 years and your claimed over 2000 weddings under your belt and a no doubt a valuable referral list why get so excited about this particular call and find that you've have to go into such ludicrous justifications for refusing it. It's very obvious that people in a different stage of their business might find such an offer useful; you didn't so why all the fuss?

If feeling that such a business model will undermine your business, well undercutting or offering a different/cheaper service has been around and a nuisance for full-timers for as long as I have been in the business and it'll never stop, new people with different ideas will always be coming along. If you feel it was a personal insult to your experience and credibility I'd have thought that all of the challenges and problems you must have encountered during those years of weddings would have given you a thicker skin.

[Clive McLaughlin]

Very late to this discussion, but in a very simple way I'm just going to say hourly rates are neither here nor there.

If you stand a chance of being paid higher for those specific hours by somebody else, then by all means, stick to your guns.

But the reality is you have two choices:

- Leave house and gain profit (amount irrelevant)
- Remain in house and gain nothing


What it all boils down to is nothing to do with principal, or pride, or 'the going rate' - it's this - do you need more money??

I suggest that in this case, Roger was not in great need of a few hundred quid.

Others may be. It's not wrong for them to accept any amount, or for anybody to offer any amount.

[Roger Gunkel]

Ahh George, have we crossed paths at sometime, you seem very keen to discredit me again and doubt my past credentials? I will ignore the tone of your post as I don't believe this forum has any place for any sort of personal argument. I started this thread because having been approached by the company or person concerned I was then mocked in an extremely arrogant way for turning down the work and wondered if others had been approached in the same way. It also made me think that most of us offer a personal service and try to earn a living wage from it, whereas the type of service on offer from this person seemed to offer something that could be a concern for businesses like many here and also potential clients that may not be getting what appears to be being sold.

Now that is just my opinion, but seemed a valid subject for discussion, however a discussion means putting different viewpoints forward that certainly don't have to agree with mine. The debate on this particular one seems to have wound up a few people, some of whom have similar views to my own and some totally different, but I like to think that they can all be discussed without malice. The obvious answer for those that don't think it is a valid topic of discussion, is to just not bother to post if they have nothing of value to add.

The type of work that was on offer may well be of interest to those who have gaps in their schedule and need a bit of extra income, but there may or may not also be dangers in supporting that type of work and approach, which seems to be a reasonable thing to discuss in my opinion.

Roger

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

I think it highly unlikely that he would normally make a 300 mile or more round journey to film and edit a 4 hour wedding shoot for £349 if he can pay someone locally to film it.

Only just seen this post; you confuse me posting twice in a row. To be honest without seeing his website I can't comment further on his Business methods. Fuel wise, it could be cheaper to drive there than pay someone else to do it, less riskier too. If he's taking multiples for a day, then he'll come unstuck soon enough, so I'd leave him to his future mistakes.

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

Contrary to what you think I feel, I don't mind anybody offering a cheaper wedding video than me, but when they talk about using BBC broadcast quality equipment, personal pre wedding meetings, a minimum of two cameras and confidence in the years of experience of the business, I find myself questioning what people think they are going to get for £349 from a company that may be 100s of miles from them.

I think having been insulted by this guy, you've come on here to blow off steam. Most websites have some marketing flannel. From those who say they worked for the BBC but don't mention in what capacity (tea boy maybe). To those who attack others work like a guy who once frequented here, whose website I saw attacked cinematic videos and basically any other professionals fullstop. I agree its misleading as is most marketing. Do you really get the burger in macdonalds that looks like the photo. Er no. Which leads to this...

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

Perhaps I am just too concerned about other people and should let people make their own mistakes.

We can't protect the consumers who won't help themselves.

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

They had thought that the highlights on his website were just short examples, but the full length video that they expected was £1000 more and they were mislead by the glossy site. As far as I know it could even have been the same company that contacted me.

Couples just don't give enough thought to video and they're their worse enemy. Requesting samples, asking questions - standard stuff really. A Bride takes an age to decide her dress, her cake, her hair and makeup and then spends a few hours browsing Video samples before making the call. In such cases they deserve what they get, but in the end its our duty also to ensure our website is clear and inform them of what do expect from a Videographer. Have a page devoted to helping couples choose a Videographer. Useful tips. You don't have to insult others work, but at least you could make them ask the right questions to your competitors. I'm thinking of doing one myself. Once this blasted season is over and I have time, I'm planning an overhaul of my website and marketing. Choosing the right Videographer is one of the pages I plan to do.

[Roger Gunkel]

Originally Posted by Clive McLaughlin

Very late to this discussion, but in a very simple way I'm just going to say hourly rates are neither here nor there.

If you stand a chance of being paid higher for those specific hours by somebody else, then by all means, stick to your guns.

But the reality is you have two choices:

- Leave house and gain profit (amount irrelevant)
- Remain in house and gain nothing


What it all boils down to is nothing to do with principal, or pride, or 'the going rate' - it's this - do you need more money??

I suggest that in this case, Roger was not in great need of a few hundred quid.

Others may be. It's not wrong for them to accept any amount, or for anybody to offer any amount.

Hi Clive,
I don't dispute your reasoning but I think that if is not as simple as you suggest. Maybe I am looking for demons under the bed, but your choices above could also be:-

-Leave house and gain profit (amount irrelevant)
-Remain in house and gain nothing.
-Leave house and work for offered amount and lose out on your own wedding booking
-Remain in house and spend the time building your own business

I don't know how much you charge and how many wedding bookings you take, but let's assume that every wedding booking that you do is subcontracted and. earns you £160 less costs, would there be enough to give you a good income? Of course if you were taking weddings at a low rate and subcontracting them out yourself, you could do many in one day and make a very good income.

Let me give you a hypothetical scenario that concerns me, John and Jane call you and enquire about their wedding on 28th September. You visit them, show them your work and give them your price, let's say £800. You hear nothing more, then receive a phone call asking if you will film a wedding for 4 hours for £160 on 28th September. As you have nothing booked, you accept, then find out that it is the same couple that you saw, but had decided to book with a 'National company' which was less than half the price of yours. this happens a few times and you are faced with a possible , choice to make,

-offer weddings at the same or even lower to claim back the market in your area
-carry on as you are and hope to pick up those clients who want to spend more
-push for more subcontract work
-do something totally different

Ok I am scaremongering to some extent, but with the fairly minimal percentage of videos to weddings, it doesn't take a lot to change the landscape. A similar thing happened with photography a few years ago, where companies like Kodak flooded the market with national advertising, subcontracting in local photographers some of whom were abysmal but cheap.

David Partington in another thread already mentioned the downward trend in his area and has now pulled out of weddings after many years, so I do think the subject is worthy of discussion.

Roger