[Nick Griffin]

Am I missing something or did this website 1) not have audio, and 2) have only nice animation with no actual “video?” Odd way to sell video.

And yes, as usual, Mark is right on the money. This appears to be a very one-sided business model which strongly favors the clients over those of us who actually do the work. (IMHO.)

[Nick Griffin]

I’ve found when shooting screens it’s best to get the largest one you can (30″ if possible) and then experiment with different resolution settings to find the combination with varying focal lengths of zoom that give you the least moire pattern interference. As with most things, make time for experimentation before you’re on the clock.

As to what the big time pros use, and I’m surprised no one has mentioned it, are “scan converters,” dedicated hardware based boxes that take the computer signal in and output beautiful quality video. I believe for the most part these are what networks use. Last I checked these boxes are quite pricey or available only with the rental of edit rooms at larger facilities.

[Nick Griffin]

[Mark Suszko] “your ONLY advantage might be your talent and creativity versus theirs”

Allow me to add one other factor which, not by coincidence, is our tactic. That’s having the specific product and category knowledge that comes from years working within a few select industries. Discount shooting and cheaper editing are no substitute for knowing what’s of interest to the target audience as well as what other marketers are saying to them. Hopefully this advantage will continue to matter. Otherwise… “Hello, and welcome to WalMart.”

[Nick Griffin]

Not sure how it is on your “side of the pond,” but here it’s not uncommon for it to take 90+ days for the first invoice to be paid by a governmental entity. SOMETIMES subsequent invoices go through faster, as in 60 days.

That said, I’m sure that Mark Suszko’s state of Illinois pays much quicker. At least I’m sure of saying this before Mark chimes in.

[Nick Griffin]

[Bill Davis] “the BIGGEST risk is usually the money the client will budget for the media buy – which is often many times the cost to create the actual advertising”

I’m not sure to what degree anyone pays attention to this anymore, but there used to be a guideline to the effect that 1/5th (20%) of the TV budget was for production and 4/5ths (80%) for the media spend. Of course there are NUMEROUS violators of this principle ranging from the one-shot Superbowl advertisers to the local market people who will run their creative into the ground to the extent that they’re spending 2% on production and 98% on running the same spot again and again and again.

[Nick Griffin]

[Mark Suszko] “The Treatment process comes before the script is written. A treatment is a blueprint for writing the script, and its the document used by the clients to define what they are looking to achieve, as well as a planning tool that will show you what kind of sets, locations, costumes, effects, actors, etc. would be needed.”

I think this is an issue of semantics. In my sphere the “treatment” is a visual description of what the final product will look like and it is based on the script. What Mark is describing as a “treatment” is part of the “creative brief,” which, in an ideal world, is what dictates what the steps which follow will convey.

I wrote about this process in the first article I did for the COW 11 years ago, How a TV Spot Comes Into Being. That was written in response to a poster who had “a great idea” for a commercial and wanted to know how to sell this idea to an advertiser.

[Nick Griffin]

Good agencies create first a concept which drives a script which is clarified by a treatment which can be created by either the agency or the production company. Ideally the two working together.

Lazy agencies make the creation of the above elements the responsibility of the production company as a condition of getting the job. (But all of this is just my observation from being around both types of agencies over the years.)

[Nick Griffin]

Zvi-

Glad you found the COW’s Business and Marketing pasture. Welcome!

From afar we really have no way of knowing just how good, or how RISKY your future flow of business is. BUT… from what you have described my personal inclination would be to go slow. Rather than incur additional liabilities while you are still in debt, wait. I say this because employees are, by their very nature, rarely able to transition from being a cash drain to a cash generator. This, along with many other reasons, are why businesses have cash reserves. If you are already in the hole don’t, for now, risk going further down.

Instead you might look to ways to “extend your brand” with add-ons and related services which can bring in more revenue but not require much investment. For example: if you are shooting weddings in HD you should have sufficient resolution to pull acceptable quality still images from most static shots. An album of stills is a sideline service you could provide for existing customers.

Another could be anniversary projects where, in future years, you re-visit the happy couples and their lives (quite possibly children) and intercut this with scenes from the original wedding. Sure that wouldn’t be an instant business, but it could be a lucrative long term source of income — as well as a real differentiator from competitors.

There are lots of ways to take the base of business you already have it provide additional work, you just have to look for them.

I hope some of this advice will, at least, help your thought process.

[Nick Griffin]

Mitch-
The best arrangements are the ones made up front and in writing. Everybody knows about everything — how much work / the nature of the work; the best estimate for labor based on those two things; and all predictable cost items including rental, purchases and consumables. When that changes mid-stream you document with a “change order” or at least a memo of understanding. That part is not rocket science, just good business. (And it’s not likely that I’m saying anything you don’t already know.)

As to who owns the purchased gear, that too should have been covered, but in the absence of any agreement on that let me offer another thought. The movie business as a whole doesn’t like to own stuff. That’s why, with the exception of large studios, nearly every cost item in a movie’s budget is an expense (i.e.- rental) not an asset (purchased property). And, as I understand the business, even with the items the studios own like fully lit sound stages these are rented to individual productions so they are part of that project’s budget as an expense, not an asset.

It’s probably best if you offer them anything for which they’ve paid, but, if their structure is that of the traditional movie accounting model, more likely these asset items are not something they would want.

Perhaps what makes sense is for you to offer to absorb these items — at their DEPRECIATED value — in lieu of some of the overage it sounds like you are owed.

My two cents, anyway. Let’s see what others have to say.

[Nick Griffin]

I think Bill exhibits a lot of common sense and has, as have a couple of others, made the point that this discussion can be more about our kids’ development than our own freedom of speech.

I have two daughters, one a freshman in college and the other a senior in high school. While I believe that they are technically old enough to be exposed to HBO’s The Wire (widely regarded as one of, if not the best TV series ever created), I have deliberately been keeping them from it. Not for the “F bombs,” but for the ghetto realism of it’s all too casual use of the “N word” and most of all its reflection of a society with so little respect for so many of its citizens. I simply don’t want my kids,at a highly impressionable age, exposed to such a harsh and brutal view of the world. These sentiments are all that’s undesirable about rap music’s lyrics magnified many, many, many times. For me an accidental “F bomb” borders on meaningless in comparison.