[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

Hey Stephen,

That is a wide question, which would easier to answer if you put in the location of where you are filming? Or at least update your profile with your own location details.

However: In the UK you do not need permission to film a building. However, if the building have logos on it and they a prominently displayed (close up) then you may need to seek permission in order not to violate trademarks etc.

One thing to be careful off is that even if the building in UK law is not protected, the people that owns the land will have rights.

If the video is not a negative exposure to the building, maybe all you need to do: Is to ask the owner/occupier for permission.

There separate rules for news/documentary items – but those depends on who the client is and how they will distribute the video – better ask a lawyer.

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

Hey Callum,

[Callum Lawrence] “I’m a 17-jobless guy with a passion for filmmaking”

At $300 a filmcity’s fc-3 camera arm, viewfinder or a follow focus will not give you more work – so IMHO don’t waste your money on it.

Instead use it to make more productions, put together a show-reel, do a bit of local networking, make a website – do anything and everything to get noticed by those people who will pay you for your passion. Once the work comes in, by all means use all of your dollars on toys.

When that is said, I’m guessing that the viewfinder will help provide you with sharper images – and that is never a bad thing when it comes to video…

My 5c.

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

Not using it for cable, but I’m sure that I could: Humax is great for catching and recording Digital TV programs.
(In the UK, not tested it in the States)

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

I’m with Mark on this.

You would be better off considering using the “introducer” in the role of an exec producer (=finance finder) in a more official capacity.

However, do keep in mind that “the producer”, the one that you are being offered an introduction to, is not normally the one with the money. A better introduction would be to someone who would commission/purchase the end product.

What I am trying to illustrate, is that the chain can be very long, and if all you have is an idea (treatment) then you have no security, unless you can turn the treatment into something tangible with a script and a sizzle-reel. This would likely cost you money, but also test and show your convictions in the project.

My best advice would be to offer a position within the production based on a small percentage fee on your profits, maybe cap it at an reasonable amount (think $10,000 rather than $50).

However, keep remembering that if all you have is the treatment and no other assets, then you are entering into a long chain of decision makers who will all want their cut of the pie, or take the whole pie…

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

I worked on a client round table video recently on OTT where one vendor had asked their customers whether: “They would pay extra not to have adverts?” – Not surprisingly an overwhelming majority said “yes!”.
However, when the feature was introduced, no one used it. They even dropped the cost to $0.01, and still no-one was willing to pay…
(https://advanced-television.com/2014/10/31/ott-2014-making-the-most-of-ott/)

[Nick Griffin] “after getting to see all of Armando Iannucci’s brilliant “The Thick Of It.””
That really summarizes the online market; if you have unique content and the consumer really wants it, then you are able to charge a premium to both the subscriber and the brands that want to be associated with it. Not much different to the DVD releases with adverts on the front.

As the battle on content is hotting up and the need to keep the viewer from cancelling your subscription, the online TV vendors will continue to tweak their offerings. With all the available data to the vendors, do not be surprised if in a near future that a Nick Griffin will automatically (unknowingly) be charged more with no advertising, where as a Todd Terry and a Mark Suszko will pay less in return for having to watch endless commercials on soap detergents and insurance companies.

On that note – my wife and I are enjoying the reboot of Ripper Street on Amazon Prime 🙂

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

Email: Mr Randall L. Stephenson CEO – randall.stephenson@att.com

(Source: https://www.ceoemail.com/us-companies.php)

Let him know the cost to your business of having them interrupting you on a daily basis and whether they would like to make a financial contribution to cover your time?

That should do the trick 🙂

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

I don’t charge for archiving either. But I do like to back everything up. These days I mainly use, BlueRay, and do one master and one copy of every disc.

However, if a client does want to get access, this is where I charge for my time and efforts. And have in the past won editing jobs based on having the archive.

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

Hey Eric,

I’m guessing that the Non-Profit paid or made arrangements with the other videographer for the previous project.

Rather than going in heavy handed asking him to sign release forms etc, call your client first and get them to confirm that they have made the arrangement for you to use the footage. He will by being the creator always “own it”, but may like to continue to support the Non-profit by allowing them to continue to use it.

At the same time, maybe give the videographer a call and say thank you for sending the footage across and ask him how he prefers to be on-screen credited for it? (If there are credits?) Then follow up with an email starting with “Thank you” and confirm that you are using the footage and crediting him accordingly.

If that doesn’t work, then it comes down to what the Non-Profit paid first time around and for what. But since you have been given the footage, it sounds like everybody is working of the same hymn-sheet on this one 🙂

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

Tough one.

In my old company we had a couple of MBA’s doing their final project, and my new business is based on some of their suggestions.

However, one interesting fact that kept on coming up in their interviews with the customers of the firm was how we often over-delivered, and then on a later projects would ask for money to cover those extras that had previously been free (such as overtime and nicer fx, music etc). As much as one needs to over-deliver on jobs, it shows that there are a real danger in “giving” things away for free in the first instance.

I am not sure that the invoice is the place to list all the things that one doesn’t charge for. In many cases, the customer doesn’t stop to read it. And the accounts department won’t care either, as long as it is signed off.

Maybe it would be better to put it on the call sheet/post production brief and an explainer there to the client that you love what you can do on this production, and thereby have gone that extra mile without charging for it.

Obviously, if you already have the kit you loose nothing by making better work for a future show-reel. Although some clients feels they should be able to use existing kit for free.
Case story: We had a specific client who wanted access to our Digital Betacam VTR by a minute cost, rather than the hourly charge. The Digital Betacam only started making real money when we sold the VTR and dry-hired in by a day-rate only…

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

Hey Ben,

Yes, you will always hold the copyright to the work, but not necessarily the rights to sell and/or exploit it further – this all depends on the license and/or contract that you enter into with the buyer. If you sell something as being “Royalty Free” to a high-end art gallery then you may be restricting yourself with regards to future earnings.

My suggestion would be for you to look at Getty Images for how to price your video. Pond5, who publishes the videos a colleague and I are working on, is also good, but doesn’t necessarily offer you as good as price, although you get 50% of all earnings (which is very good for the stock industry).

Alternatively if you think that the buyer have money to spend, do consider adding an agent as a middleman – this will complicate things, be expensive and maybe not be to your interests, but at least you won’t have to feel embarrassed about discussing the finer points of a contract.

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk