Freelance Rates?

[Vito DeFilippo]

Originally Posted by Steve House

Why stiff a fellow professional by lowballing your offer? You don't hire yourself to your client throwing in the equipment for free - why expect someone you hire to be any different?

When I got my own equipment (I'm in Montreal, where shooting rates are probably quite a bit lower than in the US), I nearly doubled my rate. The guys I shoot for didn't even bat an eye. To them, that's the way they work, so they expected the same from me.

Steve's on the right track. It's demeaning to expect a fair rate for yourself, but try to lowball the crap out of anyone you hire. Those guys end up going around you to do the weddings themselves for $1000. Then we sit back and complain that they are undercutting everyone else and driving down prices. Well, what goes around comes around.

No offense to anyone in particular...

[Joe Allen Rosenberger]

ok....one last time because this really getting boring.

NOT TOO MANY FOLKS DISAGREE!!!!!!! BUT, its just NOT the real world...ESPECIALLY in WEDDING VIDEOGRAPHY!

now you can keep this thread going and going and going and going like the energizer bunny, but just let it go.

Originally Posted by Steve House

I've been following the conversations in the RAMPS board for production sound mixers for quite some time. If you hire a sound persona or boom op and have him bring his personal gear, it's a given that you will be charged equipment rental at a similar rate as if you'd gone to a rental house and rented the same gear yourself.

My point still stands ... why would you expect a freelancer you hire for 2nd camera to operate his business in a less business-like manner that you operate your own? You the sum your rates for the services with your cost for the equipment and so must he, if he's a professional and not just a hobbyist.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Joe Allen Rosenberger

ok....one last time because this really getting boring.

NOT TOO MANY FOLKS DISAGREE!!!!!!! BUT, its just NOT the real world...ESPECIALLY in WEDDING VIDEOGRAPHY!

now you can keep this thread going and going and going and going like the energizer bunny, but just let it go.

It may well be the real world in your experience but remember, since you're the one doing the hiring without compensating the people you hire for the wear and tear on the equipment they bring to your production, your business decisions are what are making it so. If you think the real world should be different, make different choices when deciding what you pay when hiring.

[Vito DeFilippo]

Agreed Steve,

As well, if you pay a better rate, you get better and more reliable shooters, better footage, better videos, more referrals. You can raise the prices of your packages.

It's shortsighted to think only of what you can save that day of the shoot.

Recently the guys I shoot for tried out a new guy who was cheap, not much experience, but they figured, what the hell, he says he knows what he's doing.

Well, he shot the whole wedding with no sound. Thanks god we had backup sound for the ceremony, but the prep and the reception were a write off. The guys who own the studio had to refund the whole package. No chance of referrals from that couple, and a good chance of being badmouthed, and with good reason.

But hey, they saved $100 the day of the shoot, right?

Sorry to keep the thread going, but I'm not bored yet...

[K. Forman]

It's a good thing they didn't pay him what they were getting paid! This is my point, and that's all. If you are hiring a seasoned, bonafied veteran of video, the rate should reflect it. However, if you are doing all the legwork, and your new hire is unproven to you, be fair in pay, but at labor rates.

[Ray Lane]

Originally Posted by Jon East

We pay $200 to $300 based on experience and equipment being used. I find it amazing how camera operators think they are worth more. Most shoots last 5 to 6 hours. That's between 40 and 50 per hour, is that not enough?

I guess that depends on a few things. Is it enough for you if you were doing it? If so then yeah. Personally, I would work for that.

[Mark Bournes]

A lot of jobs I do break down to about $50 per hour. I too would work for that rate.

Mark
www.sharkvp.com

[Steve House]

$40 to $50 per hour is certainly fair for labour. But "labour" just covers their skills as a camera operator, not the costs of any equipment they might provide. It's what they should earn if they operated a second camera that you owned or worked for s studio or production company, etc, and operated their employer's equipment. But if they are expected to provide a gear package as well, basically your company is renting their equipment from them and I think it's fair to add the prevailing market rate for your rental of the gear to the compensation for their labour. It's just as if you'd gone to a rental house for the extra gear you needed to get the coverage you promised the client and then hired them as an extra set of hands and eyes to operate it.

I teach computer applications for my day job. If you hire me to come into your company to teach 2 days of Project Management or Access Development, it's going to cost you X dollars. But if you don't have a training facility and computers for the students and I have to go hire a dozen laptops in order to conduct the course, you can bet I'll add those rental costs to the rate I'm charging you. I don't see why hiring someone as a camera operator to provide B-cam coverage for you should be any different.

[Mark Bournes]

True, if you're using you own gear on the shoot the rates are definitly higher per hour.

[Joe Allen Rosenberger]

So, where'a all the wedding videographers(hired help-not owners) making 500-600 per day ie. cam rate/op rate?????

Dream land......

Originally Posted by Steve House

$40 to $50 per hour is certainly fair for labour. But "labour" just covers their skills as a camera operator, not the costs of any equipment they might provide. It's what they should earn if they operated a second camera that you owned or worked for s studio or production company, etc, and operated their employer's equipment. But if they are expected to provide a gear package as well, basically your company is renting their equipment from them and I think it's fair to add the prevailing market rate for your rental of the gear to the compensation for their labour. It's just as if you'd gone to a rental house for the extra gear you needed to get the coverage you promised the client and then hired them as an extra set of hands and eyes to operate it.

I teach computer applications for my day job. If you hire me to come into your company to teach 2 days of Project Management or Access Development, it's going to cost you X dollars. But if you don't have a training facility and computers for the students and I have to go hire a dozen laptops in order to conduct the course, you can bet I'll add those rental costs to the rate I'm charging you. I don't see why hiring someone as a camera operator to provide B-cam coverage for you should be any different.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Joe Allen Rosenberger

So, where'a all the wedding videographers(hired help-not owners) making 500-600 per day ie. cam rate/op rate?????

Dream land......

The camera ops are not making $500 to $600 a day. The camera op is making $200 a day, the rest is going right back out of their pocket again to pay for the camera and other costs of doing business. That additional $100-200-$300 you're paying is not income to the operator, it's a direct expense of their doing business that needs to be recuperated - their compensation for their work is what's left over after the costs of doing the job are recovered. With you notions, they could be working full-time and going broke because it actually costs them more to do the work than they earn from doing it. Basically you want them to work for free, throwing in their labour at no charge if you use them as the source for the extra equipment you need to rent to get the proper coverage. If you prefer just to pay the operator for his labour, then that's fine - hire the operator and pay him the $200 that you feel his labour is worth. I actually agree with you that that's fair compensation. But then either provide the camera and other gear he'll use out of your own equipment inventory as the production house contracted to do the shoot or if you don't own the necessary equipment, go rent it through your normal equipment supply channels - as a repeat customer you can probably negotiate a rate from them that is less than a single individual rentor would have to charge you in order to break even.

I would assume you have factored into the fees you quote your clients the costs of purchasing, maintaining, and replacing your equipment, at least if it's a business and not a hobby that's the way you ought to be doing it. Why are you so adamant that it's okay for you to do that as a freelance wedding video producer working for your client but it's not okay for the freelance videographer you hire to work for you to do the same? It's unreasonable to expect a professional to go invest $5000 to $15000 or more in the tools required to conduct his business and then to loan them to you for free. If all you expect is a "kid with a kam" to pick up some b-roll, then maybe. But if you expect a pro, one way or the other you gotta pay for the gear necessary to produce a professional job as well as the skills to do it.

[Thomas Smet]

Usually it costs around $250.00 to just rent a camera for the day. You are basically getting the rental camera plus the person to run it for the same price. I also think it is a little unfair to pay a person for a shoot for the entire day since some weddings can go much longer than others.

While yes $50.00 an hour does seem like a lot you have to remember there is usually only 1 wedding a week for that shooter. This actually only works out to be $20,000 per year if they had a 8 hour wedding every single saturday of the year. Chances are there will not be a wedding for them every weekend so you maybe cut that in half. If you live in a region that actually has a real winter then there usually are not as many weddings during that time. $10,000.00 to $20,000.00 a year is not very much for somebody to own their own equipment and maintain that equipment and put insurance on that equipment.

[Joe Allen Rosenberger]

Dude...youre way out of line and you really do not know what you are talking about(i know you think you do but...). I pay cam ops 300-400 per day but who gives a hot one. and they use my gear. I work in Hollywood as a cam op as well too, Cam Ops rarely get the 250 rental...day rates for cam ops shooting with handheld cameras rarely exceed 300.00'day.

I am done with this thread because you just like to hear yourself talk....thats cool, keep going. In the end though, i dont care what you think...it doesnt affect me.. NO WEDDINGS CAM OPS are "GETIING" 250 to 300 camera rentals PLUS and 300.00 a day "cam Op" rate. Keep complaining about what they should be getting......but its not reality of what they actually are.

I live in LA California....so no, I do not use "kids" as cam ops....I use Hollywood freelancers who really know how to use cameras and work in television/feature often and they have "0" complaints about 300 to 400 per day including gear or not.


PLUS....what "freelance"...wedding cam op invests 15K in gear......this industry is 90% hacks out there that try to cut every corner they can so 15K in gear....is also again not reality, your making numbers up or what you think they should be but nothing factual or real world. 15 K is spent by some owners/operators but not too many freelances are spending that kind of money to shoot weddings....not happening.

Im out...this thread is usless, non educating and is now anoying. Have at it all you want.....waste of time.

Originally Posted by Steve House

The camera ops are not making $500 to $600 a day. The camera op is making $200 a day, the rest is going right back out of their pocket again to pay for the camera and other costs of doing business. That additional $100-200-$300 you're paying is not income to the operator, it's a direct expense of their doing business that needs to be recuperated - their compensation for their work is what's left over after the costs of doing the job are recovered. With you notions, they could be working full-time and going broke because it actually costs them more to do the work than they earn from doing it. Basically you want them to work for free, throwing in their labour at no charge if you use them as the source for the extra equipment you need to rent to get the proper coverage. If you prefer just to pay the operator for his labour, then that's fine - hire the operator and pay him the $200 that you feel his labour is worth. I actually agree with you that that's fair compensation. But then either provide the camera and other gear he'll use out of your own equipment inventory as the production house contracted to do the shoot or if you don't own the necessary equipment, go rent it through your normal equipment supply channels - as a repeat customer you can probably negotiate a rate from them that is less than a single individual rentor would have to charge you in order to break even.

I would assume you have factored into the fees you quote your clients the costs of purchasing, maintaining, and replacing your equipment, at least if it's a business and not a hobby that's the way you ought to be doing it. Why are you so adamant that it's okay for you to do that as a freelance wedding video producer working for your client but it's not okay for the freelance videographer you hire to work for you to do the same? It's unreasonable to expect a professional to go invest $5000 to $15000 or more in the tools required to conduct his business and then to loan them to you for free. If all you expect is a "kid with a kam" to pick up some b-roll, then maybe. But if you expect a pro, one way or the other you gotta pay for the gear necessary to produce a professional job as well as the skills to do it.

[Marcus Marchesseault]

I think cam rental plus labor is not realistic. People don't expect to pay me for labor plus car rental when I go to a job. A vehicle is an assumed expense for a professional. Handymen don't charge people tool rental prices when they show up for a job as it would cost $500 to hang a picture frame if tool rental costs were included. Now that cameras can pay themselves off in just a few events, they are a simple tool that you need on your belt. Owning a camera is going to be somewhat expected from a professional event videographer. Unfortunately, that still gets you $200-$300 per day. If you want more than that, I suspect you will need to work for Joe...

[Joe Allen Rosenberger]

Marcus..I couldnt agree withy your more. I happen to pay my cam ops 300 to 400, and they use my gear, that is more than fair..I KNOW!

Steve house has been running his chops about the rental thing......200 for the cam op and 250 to 300 for the rental, something like that.....like i said, that is unrealistic.....and I know he will never get that rate anywhere, but he rips on me saying that my rates are basically lame.....what a joke!

When a mechanic gets a job at a dealership.....they are expected to own almost all of their own tools....and they make an hourly rate which does not include a tools rental. this kind of thing can go on and on depending what biz your in, but this guy kept at it about the cam op pay and the rental pay....bla bla bla. I mean.....come on dude....seriously. By your reply Marcus....I am happy to know that everyone here are not idiots! and i could care less if i get flamed for this post....I am so irritated by the stupid remarks which are uneducated.....and made up.

PLUS.....if you dont like my rates, or anyone else's.....go do something else for work...who cares. Lets all protest for every worker in the USA.....because were all under paid....right???

Originally Posted by Marcus Marchesseault

I think cam rental plus labor is not realistic. People don't expect to pay me for labor plus car rental when I go to a job. A vehicle is an assumed expense for a professional. Handymen don't charge people tool rental prices when they show up for a job as it would cost $500 to hang a picture frame if tool rental costs were included. Now that cameras can pay themselves off in just a few events, they are a simple tool that you need on your belt. Owning a camera is going to be somewhat expected from a professional event videographer. Unfortunately, that still gets you $200-$300 per day. If you want more than that, I suspect you will need to work for Joe...