Shawn Miller
1
COW Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
[Bill Davis] “I didn’t mean that nothing – music, projection, concept were created without editing, but rather that the performance was presented as a cohesive unit rather than an assembly of elements. The sublime tradition of the stage competing and merging with the traditions of broadcast.”
Well, being a fan of dance, live performance and animation, I thought it was very cool. 🙂
Shawn
-
The bigger post houses in my town seem to be going Avid or Premiere. Almost all of the corporate folks I know are Premiere Pro, but most of them have always been PPro. A few of the agency folks I know are also switching from FCP to Premiere. When I ask why, most people say that they’re going Adobe because of the integration between AE, PPro, Audition and Photoshop.
Shawn
-
[Craig Shamwell] “No not all! FCPX is great for Web Producing because it’s so fast and media friendly! But there are those who discount this section of producing as not professional! When there are those making a good living only producing for the web. I so wish I could work on films but I may never have a chance to do that, who knows?”
Ah, I see. I completely understand, 90% of what I produce is for web and intranent too. 🙂
Shawn
-
[Steve Connor] “[Shawn Miller] “Also, if most paid web content originates from traditional post production workflows”
What do you define as traditional?”
Maybe traditional is the wrong word. How about standard? My point is that the web content that most people are paying to see, is for the most part, films and shows which were originally produced for broadcast, theatrical and DVD/Blu-ray distribution. So I was curious to know what this meant:
[Craig Shamwell] “Producing content for the web far outweighs any film and television production.”
Again, is the web more relevant for the majority of working editors…? is web content more important in the grand scheme of the editing universe…? is television and theatrical distribution irrelevant now that we have the web…? help me out here. 🙂
And if this is all true, what makes FCPX a better choice for producing this kind of content?
Shawn
-
[Chris Conlee] “I think he’s merely saying that internet content can no longer be considered “non-professional” in general.”
Fair enough, I think I’m still a little hung up on the terms “outweighs” though. I’m still not sure if he’s alluding to mass or importance. I.E. there’s more content on the web, vs web distribution is more desirable. 🙂 Also, if most paid web content originates from traditional post production workflows, how is FCPX better positioned to produce content bound for that medium?
Shawn
-
EDIT: Sorry, I meant to say that I was curious how you all are handling composting with material originating from 3D applications and cameras that shoot in log… I’m looking at you, Simon. 🙂
How do you folks work in linear and log… is it via plugins, LUTs, or is the capability built in?
Thanks,
Shawn
-
[Craig Shamwell] “Producing content for the web far outweighs any film and television production.”
I’m not sure I understand what you mean, Craig. Are you saying that web production is more common, or more important?
Thanks,
Shawn
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “[Shawn Miller] “In the past, it wasn’t that unusual for companies like that to pay several thousand dollars a day to produce simple, short, talking head videos. [breaking in here, reality just broke] Obviously those days are gone, but (luckily) the notion that these videos have value has remained. So for many of them, $1000.00 for a full day of video production work isn’t that big of a deal.”
oh good baby jesus. does anyone under forty in london want to get in on this one.
where are. my. cufflinks.”
lol – I could show you invoices that would BLOW.YOUR.MIND! 🙂
Shawn
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “sure you’re charging what you’re worth there shawn. fair ball!
you’re fully minted 3d/2d mograph with editing tho right? that is somewhat the holy grail to be fair.”
Yes that is true, though I do a lot more editing than anything else these days. 🙂 In regards to why I think a shooter’s rate in this town should be in the $700 range… maybe look at it this way. This is an area where several multibillion dollar companies have offices… many of them also have video needs. In the past, it wasn’t that unusual for companies like that to pay several thousand dollars a day to produce simple, short, talking head videos. Obviously those days are gone, but (luckily) the notion that these videos have value has remained. So for many of them, $1000.00 for a full day of video production work isn’t that big of a deal. $350 for a half day of work almost seems like free labor to them. In short, if the folks who hire you feel that you’re qualified to do the work, then they shouldn’t balk at that rate (it’s usually not that much to them), that’s why I say that $700 a day isn’t that steep if you’re bringing your own camera, lights and audio package. 🙂
Lastly, I’m a fulltime, salaried employee right now. However, if I went back to freelance work, my rates would be somewhat higher… mostly because I have a pretty good idea of what big companies will spend on video production services.
Shawn
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “[Shawn Miller] “I wouldn’t quote anything less than $700 for a full day,”
jesus shawn ye have it good. as good as I’ll get is around $580 for the day off a minted client.
broadcast UK freelance for short form is well lower than that too.”Wow, that’s surprising. I would have guessed higher rates, because of the quality of work expected.
The higher rates here might be due to the cost of living. I think the average 1 bedroom apartment in the city is around $1,200 US. Also, corporate gigs tend to pay pretty well here… not sure what broadcast pays. 🙂
Shawn