Posted by Seattle Eric on 10/12/05 02:59

Steve King wrote:

> "Seattle Eric" <noone@erehwon.gov> wrote in message
> news:434bf4e2$0$4862$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net...
>
>>Larry J. wrote:
>>
>>>Well, many producers sill swear by the tried and true, $1,000 per
>>>finished minute, as a general rule.
>>
>>Many producers don't think very well. I'd say $1,000+/minute, UP TO
>>FIFTEEN MINUTES. After that, it starts dropping off.
>>
>
>
> When you say the above, you must have a general type of video in mind.<ETC>

Absolutely. We can all point to commercials that cost a quarter mil for
20 seconds. Really, WE know the ROT is fairly pointless.

> My client wants
> high production values, which means pretty lighting and at least two days
> with a dolly and one with a camera crane that can get the camera up 16 feet.

Sweet.

> This project will bill out at considerably more than $1k per minute. As an
> example of a video that comes under the ROT, last week I shot some footage
> of a client demoing some test equipment. Each test was shot as a single
> camera shot. It took about two hours. I put the project together today in
> about four hours. Maybe a total of 10 minutes of video for a web site.
> That will fall considerably under $1k per minute. In short, I still think
> RsOT aren't worth much unless one's work is all pretty much the same. I
> hope mine stays sufficiently diverse that I have to pull out the spread
> sheet each time to stay solvent.
> Steve King

I dunno: I'd be wishing for more of the aerial and crane shot stuff myself.

What part of the country are you in?

>
>

[Back to original message]