[Mark Suszko]

While not a lawyer, I believe the church cannot claim “fair use” in this case. The bottom line for myself is, if the church takes donations, and they are showing the copyrighted material at the same service where donations are being accepted, they cannot claim fair use. Educational fair use is probably what they are thinking they have, but I don’t think they can meet the tests a court would apply. Maybe if they didn’t take up a collection that day… but really, I still don’t think they’d really be in the clear. A divinity school, where the teacher puts together clips for a classroom lecture, is more likely to be able to claim fair use.

When Mel Gibson was showing Passion of the Christ in various churches to generate interest and buzz, it made the news thatsome church got ahold of a bootleg copy and charged admission to parishioners to see it. I wanted to ask them what bible they were using that had only nine commandments in it.

[Mark Suszko]

Will probably be on the DVD bonus material.

[Mark Suszko]

What comes to my mind is to put wireless mics on two of them, and get some of their conversations while they ride. I would probably seed the conversation in advance with some selected topics that would likely lead to either funny or pithy commentary.

Adding some POV cameras to one of the bikes might be nice.

I am of the school of thought that documentaries are “found” in the editing process, that you go over all your assets and figure out a narrative thread and then build to that. That’s not to say you don’t start the project with a point of view, or that you don’t steer it by the choices you already made in who, what, where, and when you shoot. But that the story sometimes evolves beyond what you started with, or goes off in an unexpected direction, and then it gets entertaining, because you’re learning something new along with the audience.

So, what is the point of this ride? If the previous program disappointed the client, I could maybe see why, if all it was was montage of riders without a true narrative thread. Beyond the mild thrill of seeing pictures of yourself, that would soon get really boring.

Examples of themes that you could play with would include:

If this is an established run, how does the “new guy” who’s never done it before, keep up with the experienced riders? Does he fall behind and get lost? DO they coach and encourage him/her along the way? Or is it very competitive? If it’s truly a race, can they discuss strategy? What goes on in their minds while riding? Can you get some commentaries from those folks, grading the newbie, during rest/water/pitstop breaks, or after the thing is over?

Is the run about the destination? What about talking about the anticipation along the way, the expectations?

Is the run about what you find along the way? The terrain, the sights, the people?

With those ideas, it could be you could salvage the original program just by adding-in voiceover and on-camera interviews of recollections and anecdotes with some of the participants.

Or, you could apply these concepts in shooting the new version. Create a narrative with a 3-act structure. Beginning, middle, end. The beginning can be a question: will Joe Spokes be able to make the whole trip, and in what condition? Or it could be something like: “They are the seven biggest hills in what’s considered a very flat state, and we want to see the view from each of them to learn about the land and people around them”.
Or: “This is a run my late father used to take, and this is my first time following it myself. I want to see what he saw, feel what it was like, and maybe reminisce a bit”.

To produce something like this you need good planning and logistics, and usually more than one camera. You need a camera car and/or bike travelling along with the group, an advance vehicle that can scoot miles ahead, deploy a camera and sticks to get them driving by, using high, normal, and ultra-low angles, then repeat. And it would be great to have POV cams and wireless mics on one or more of the bikes as well. This all obviously ups the cost and complexity of the project, but the likelihood of a worthwhile result is much better.

[Mark Suszko]

I sometimes tell this story to prospective clients that act timid about costs.

There’s an old fashioned barbershop in my town, had a big line of cars parked outside, lot of customers for such a small place. I drove past the front and saw the sign they’d put up that brought in all the business:

“We fix $7 haircuts”.

Thus endeth the lesson.

[Mark Suszko]

It is very different now. I’d call the TV station that’s wanting to run the show. They’ll have a lawyer on staff that should be consulted. The Station may be thinking their blanket annual license agreements with BMI and ASCAP cover this. IANaL, but while it might possibly cover them, it doesn’t cover YOU at all.

Wanna make big money in TV? Get a degree in communications and entertainment/copyright law. It’s like patenting oxygen.

[Mark Suszko]

“Forget it, Johnny; it’s Polynesian Town”.

[Mark Suszko]

From my extensive legal training ( of watching TV shows), I’d point out that contracts assume a “meeting of the minds”; that both parties are in agreement about the facts of the contract. If your backstory description is accurate, this contract fails the first test. So I don’t think you’re in a weak position from a lawsuit standpoint. But you want to avoid things going that far.

From here it looks like you did the best you could with a client that kept changing the arrangements. We all have a desire to please, but sometimes you just can’t please everyone. Then it’s best to walk away while trying to remain fair and open to negotiations over how to conclude things.

The best idea I have read inthis thread, adn they are all good ideas, is to try to go over this client’s head and finish up the deal, up or down, with that person. Stress going out on a classy, professionsal note.

[Mark Suszko]

If you charge a flat rate I can guarantee you this: you will be too high or too low. Neither is good business. I would go hourly, perhaps with a minimum base rate under that. A lower hourly for render time is up to you, but I would say this about that: can you use the machine for any other work while it is tied up rendering their job? No? Then there’s opportunity cost to consider, so I would choose not to discount the “render time rate” much if at all.

The basic formula is: learn and calculate all your true costs of doing business, including the things you don’t normally think about. The others here can list those for you, but it’s been mentioned here many times before, in great detail. You could keyword seach the archives for rates, etc…

Divide annual costs/ money by annual hours (less vacation, manitenance downtime, etc.) to get the break-even. Add a markup for profit of whatever percent you think is fair and the market will bear. Now you have a figure below which it does not pay to take the job or turn the machine on, rather, you would be more productive cold-calling or drumming up new accounts or flipping burgers than doing the guy’s job.

There’s exceptions to every rule: some folks do pro-bono jobs for the love of the subject, or as personal favors, or to use as a calling card to get seen by the people associated with the charity who DO pay for projects. Or just because it’s a particularly cool creative challenge. Or because they need to look like they are still in business during a bad time and are hiding the fact they are not charging. (That secret is very hard to keep)

Be careful though of giving it away for free because you are a fan, if they can truly afford to pay you anyway. You will lowball yourself into a corner.

[Mark Suszko]

I’m sure you could do this with Shake or Combustion as well, and there’s an outside chance Motion can do it. There might even be a 10-dollar plug-in to handle it from DigitalHeaven. I LOVE those guys.

[Mark Suszko]

…because if I want to get REALLY creative, I STOP taking medication:-)

“I don’t DO drugs; I AM drugs”-Salvador Dali