Fixing others work

cameragod

Well-known member
I'm getting an increase in this lately. People calling up wanting someone to fix stuff they have already paid to have shot. The latest one they asked if I could fix it without a re-shoot but I couldn't. All the lights for the interviews were at chest height. After having a chat with the makeup lady on the shoot she told me the woman behind the camera had been googling tutorials on how to "videographer" during the shoot. Her assistant, who the makeup lady thought was the woman's partner, didn't realize that the light stands could go up. All the sound was on the camera mic as they didn't turn on the radio lapel. It was just an unholy shambles... but the client had paid a agency top rate for it. The client is unhappy. The agency is spending a fortune in post. All because they tried to shave some cost off on hiring a real field crew. Its just insane.
 

cyndygreen1

Well-known member
Really...googling how to do the job you were hired to do?
The company needs to sue the idiot videographer and then hire a pro.
 

cameragod

Well-known member
They were flown from Australia to New Zealand to do this shoot. They had good kit and their website looks amazing but there is no way they shot what was on it.
I feel angry for the client who had a good realistic budget but have been delivered crap. The agency are now trying to bully the client in accepting the work. I'm telling them not to pay.
 

Douglas

Well-known member
The company needs to sue the idiot videographer and then hire a pro.
Who's the idiot here?

Wasn't there someone representing the agency or the client at the shoot who could have seen for themselves that the shot was **** on the monitor? A monitor is especially critical when using a new unknown crew. It sounds like it was such a bad setup that you could probably diagnose it as soon as you walked into the room even if there wasn't a monitor. Someone in authority should have blown the whistle before the first frame of video was even captured. I have no sympathy for the client or the agency. Whoever was running the shoot was the idiot.
 

cameragod

Well-known member
From what I understand Douglas, the woman running the camera was also representing the Agency. I suspect she booked herself and her partner as the crew so they could get a week away in New Zealand and pocket more of the budget. According to the makeup lady, who's husband is a grip, the clients side of the shoot was well planned and organized but they left the shooting up to the crew, after all they were supposed to be the experts, she took photos because she couldn't believe what she was seeing.
 
From what I understand Douglas, the woman running the camera was also representing the Agency. I suspect she booked herself and her partner as the crew so they could get a week away in New Zealand and pocket more of the budget. According to the makeup lady, who's husband is a grip, the clients side of the shoot was well planned and organized but they left the shooting up to the crew, after all they were supposed to be the experts, she took photos because she couldn't believe what she was seeing.


If that's the case it sounds like a straight up case of Fraud on the part of the agent. They should be liable for not only the cost of the shoot but any additional costs involved in the re-shoot as well. From what you are saying this isnt just a matter of something not going to expectations, it is a matter of somebody misrepresenting themselves for financial gain.
 

svp

Well-known member
...the clients side of the shoot was well planned and organized but they left the shooting up to the crew, after all they were supposed to be the experts.
Haven't we all said that's what clients should do since they aren't experts in our field of work? Reading all these posts, the client should DEFINITELY sue the agency for the shoddy work and should not pay them another dime.
 
Top