XDCam for ABC
- Thread starter your boy
- Start date
Hiding Under Here
Well-known member
ABC wants everything shot in SD in the DV25 codec. You need to know if you are shooting 16x9 or 4x3. You can only use the 23GB discs.
Flaca Productions
Well-known member
HUH is right. no IMX. no 50 gig discs. no HD
The sad thing is that ABC will be paying only the SD equipment rate for the use of your HD Camera/Lense and the $2000 software update that you paid to allow your HD camera to shoot SD. I face the same problem except that when ABC calls they get DVCam for SD. I refuse to shoot with the 700 for their SD rate.
Unfortunately, I think the HD rate bubble may be bursting, or at the very least deflating. I had a friend tell me about a production company that is pretty well known and produces a lot of shows out there that has sent out a letter saying that they will not pay the current going HD rates because the cameras have come down to "below Betacam" prices. He was offered $1500 one-man rate and would of had to have rented an F-900 because they didn't want his HDX. Last time I checked new prices, they were a lot more than a Betacam.
SimonW
Well-known member
Much as I hate to see rates declining, these days I do not think that it is feasible to charge extra for high def production as far as camera operation goes. The PDW-700 is around the same price as the PDW-530 before it.
I don't see the point of doing this. Your income helps to pay for your 700 purchase regardless of whether you use it or not. You might as well get use out of it even if you have to shoot in SD.
Let me throw this out: Would a rental house charge less if you told them you were just gonna use the camera in SD mode?
Stoney
Well-known member
I agree, HD production rates are higher... but I don't think the rates are just due to better quality cameras/pictures. Rates also increased because rates had not risen for many years. Maybe the beta rates ten years ago were inflated? Maybe HD rates are inflated? What matters is what the market will bear. Dropping rates really low to attract clients will eventually backfire on those who do it but inflating rates may do the same.
Regarding pay structure for HD cam in SD mode... your other camera is available... why not put the wear and tear on the lesser of the two cameras? I would use the DVCam. Why use the more expensive camera if they aren't paying for it...
TimG
Well-known member
No they wouldn't. But they'd charge you less for the SD glass and the SD monitor you'd be using . . . and you'd be able to get away with Ni-Cad batteries instead of lithium-ion.
I'm sure production companies would love to have us give them rental house deals including the 7-day rental for 3-day rate.
Back in 1999 a cameraman and Beta package went for around $900 / day. A sound Tech with gear was around $350. Now, a cameraman and SD package go for at most $1,100. DV is around $700 and yet today, a sound tech with gear commands $550. So in 10 years camera rates have increased 22.2% and sound rates have increased 63.6%.
If we were able to keep pace with that 63.6% increase we should be charging around $1,472 . . . and that's NOT taking into consideration the upgrades in gear we've all had to make in the past 10 years. That rate would be for the same package we used back in 1999.
No, in my mind, it really doesn't seem too unreasonable to ask for $1,600 - $1,900 for a good HD package. Don't forget that the networks are paying production companies more for that HD programming we're shooting.
I'd be curious to know how network rates have changed over the past 10 years - both for camera and sound. Anyone out there have an idea?
Tim
Last edited:
Exactly my point. Just because an HD camera is only being used for SD, doesn't mean your payment for it that month is less, too(Yes, the camera itself may be less expensive than an HD camera purchased 5yrs ago, but you get my point). I don't know if I agree on the SD lens on an HD camera just because you are shooting SD. If my understanding is wrong, just let me know, but isn't the SD image being downsampled from the full HD image created? So if there are abberations, etc., wouldn't they still show up on the D/C'd SD image? Of course, I'm playing devils advocate here, because there are tons of people using SD lenses on HD cameras everyday. It depends on the quality of the SD lens and resolution of the camera as to what you can get away with. Also, I don't buy the battery argument, I don't shoot with Li-ions on my Vari.
With the economic state that the country is in right now and basically an over-abundance of photographers, the nets and production companies are regaining control of the ship, so to speak. For a while, a lot of us have been in the "take-it-or-leave-it" position, now the nets can dole out that ultimatum again, if they're your bread-and-butter.
There will always be someone that will take a super-low rate or low-ball just to get the job and that hurts all of us. Everyone has to do what they feel is right and when business is good, we can all turn down the low rate, but if someone hasn't worked in months and they need to feed their family and keep a roof over their heads, it still hurts the "cause" if they accept the low rate, but it will hurt him and his family even more if he doesn't.
Isn't it funny how some threads just go from something simple into something so completely different?
Hiding Under Here
Well-known member
Answer: yes, it is funny - funny meaning very very interesting.
I have written a number of responses to this thread evolution and erased them all for various reasons. I think this issue is THE key obstacle facing us in the coming months. And Run and Gun your answer was excellent. Pricing is more about supply and demand. But I don't think the networks and production companies are so much "controlling the ship" but telling us "we have to limit our costs, we have to know what you are going to charge us on a shoot to shoot basis so we can budget responsibly". The economic down turn is hurting everybody. Those folks just have better accountants than we do and they are on top of their numbers and their financial objectives.
There was a time when we were a relatively cheap budget line item. But as production budgets shrunk our fees loomed larger and larger. The sheer volume of freelance work in the 1990s created excesses. Some people charged for things they didn't have or didn't use. At the networks, time sheets have always been submitted on an honor system. Certainly there were abuses there -- or at least a lack of clearly defined standards regarding the parameters of the work day.
Now things are in great flux. There is no clear stability in the business. Few of us have any real sense how this downturn will affect us in the long term. A year from now will freelancers who are reading these words still be in this line of work? Or will some have moved onto something else? I dare say that if we had the same number of freelancers now that existed in 1992 (to pluck a year out of the hat) things wouldn't be so unstable. Supply and demand have swung out of balance. That's having a huge impact on rates and it is the single biggest reason, I believe, that we haven't seen any real increase in thirty years.
I have written a number of responses to this thread evolution and erased them all for various reasons. I think this issue is THE key obstacle facing us in the coming months. And Run and Gun your answer was excellent. Pricing is more about supply and demand. But I don't think the networks and production companies are so much "controlling the ship" but telling us "we have to limit our costs, we have to know what you are going to charge us on a shoot to shoot basis so we can budget responsibly". The economic down turn is hurting everybody. Those folks just have better accountants than we do and they are on top of their numbers and their financial objectives.
There was a time when we were a relatively cheap budget line item. But as production budgets shrunk our fees loomed larger and larger. The sheer volume of freelance work in the 1990s created excesses. Some people charged for things they didn't have or didn't use. At the networks, time sheets have always been submitted on an honor system. Certainly there were abuses there -- or at least a lack of clearly defined standards regarding the parameters of the work day.
Now things are in great flux. There is no clear stability in the business. Few of us have any real sense how this downturn will affect us in the long term. A year from now will freelancers who are reading these words still be in this line of work? Or will some have moved onto something else? I dare say that if we had the same number of freelancers now that existed in 1992 (to pluck a year out of the hat) things wouldn't be so unstable. Supply and demand have swung out of balance. That's having a huge impact on rates and it is the single biggest reason, I believe, that we haven't seen any real increase in thirty years.
chicagoshootr
Well-known member
I think that was the case, but I'm not sure that is necessarily true now. In the cable entertainment area, I've heard from one client that partly justified dropping their HD crew rates because the networks aren't paying the same premium for HD programming that they used to.
But I agree we have to stick to our guns on rates. I had lowered my published rate somewhat last year to be in line with what my larger clients are willing to pay...in the $1975 range for crew...and that's as low as I'm gonna go. The cameras may be coming down in price, but nothing else is. And lord knows many of us have multiple cameras now just to stay in the game. That all adds up.
What I might consider would be a doing a deal on rates with large clients that would be willing to guarantee a certain number of days per season where I could make it up in bulk. I had a similar offer last summer and turned it down for a variety of reasons...including the fact that I couldn't commit to the schedule.
Lastly, I know some of my comrades are poaching other markets now, and in many cases working as locals hundreds of miles from home.
You do what ya gotta do.
Wait, wait, have you seen the price of HD monitor, lenses, and various accessories lately?
Last edited:
dhart
Well-known member
Right now everyone in this business is getting hammered. The networks, the program producers, etc. For example, a good client of mine who produces a daytime talk show is cutting 2 million out their production budget this year. Less work from them, but I've been able to replace it with other work thus far.
It's quite possible we are in a deflationary period. That means HD rates are gonna come down whether any of us like it or not. As others have said it's a supply and demand situation and right now (and for most of my 38 years in the business) supply greatly exceeds demand.
It's quite possible we are in a deflationary period. That means HD rates are gonna come down whether any of us like it or not. As others have said it's a supply and demand situation and right now (and for most of my 38 years in the business) supply greatly exceeds demand.
SimonW
Well-known member
Yes I have. But if ABC prefer XDCAM discs to SP doesn't it make sense to given them XD if you can, regardless of SD or HD? I do not know if ABC are 16:9 or not, but if they are I am sure that you stand to be employed more by them if you give them 16:9 SD footage on an XD disc rather than 4:3 SP from a much older camera just to cut off your nose to spite your face so to speak. It depends on what they are really asking for. Each situation needs to be examined seperately.
In my own case I still own a 510, a camera that I really do not want to get rid of. But now I am using an EX3 for bread and butter stuff until HD sorts itself out a bit more (with 50 and 60p at 1080 literally just around the corner I can wait a bit longer). Which begs the question, an EX3 is a 1/2" based prosumer camera in HD, while a 510 is a 2/3" broadcast camera. I can still fit real optics onto the front of an EX3, and my monitoring equipment and accessories that you mention cost the same as per any other HD equipment. So what should the day rate be for an EX3 compared to the 510 bearing those factors in mind?
I'd feel a bit 'off' charging a premium for it. However I still need to be able to pay the bills and invest in new equipment (such as a replacement 2/3" camera) further down the line. I suppose it depends whatever people will pay you. If you have no shortage of clients that will pay you a higher premium for HD then I applaud you and wish you well. However in the case of the ABC thing I don't think things are so cut and dried. As I mentioned, the 700 is the same price as the 530 was not so long back, but people weren't charging a premium for that.
I dunno, I'm going all over the place here. Shades of grey I think is the best way to sum it up.
Run & Gun, why in heavens name would you rent an HD camera for a SD shoot in the first place?
As for the argument of costs of BetaCams vs. todays HD cameras (ie. PDW-700 & HDX900), yeah, the camera body costs less, but the glass & monitors cost substantially more. Also, the dayrates we're kicking around here also include maintainence and insurance costs. I don't know about you but I pay a lot more for those things then I paid 10 years ago.
As stated by Stoney, there's no sense in pulling out the 700 for an SD shoot when I have a DVCam that meets all of ABC's requirements at this time. Basically they ask for a digital camera that can shoot 4:3 and 16:9. The DSR-500WS meets all these requirements and is on ABC's "universally accepted list". Ironically much of the news stuff is still BetaSP.
My problem using the 700 for SD is more from a business standpoint. So you shoot SD for them with the 700 today and when they finally get around to going HD they'll come back with "you've been shooting everything on this camera for the SD rate so why should we pay any more for HD now?". A bad precedent to set.
One other note, as of Jan. 6 NBC has lowered their rate for HD packages by $100 from their previous HD rate - that's regardless of the camera. Sure glad I'm not paying off a F900!
LOL... I wouldn't. I'm in the very, very fortunate position right now to have a steady deal and I can turn down the shoot if they won't accept either one of my two cameras, a VariCam(DVCProHD) or WS Betacam. It's not worth it for me to rent, right now. In the past, I said I would rent an F-900 if need be, for a shoot, but after Sports Century was cancelled, I never needed one again(and they provided the F-900's for those of us that didn't own them anyway and gave us an elevated rate). I think I've only had one call for an F-900 shoot since then, but I didn't do it, the rental wasn't gonna be worth it. Cameradude got a call the other day for an F-900 shoot, but it was a low rate and he would of had to rent. I believe it was $1500 for a 1 man F-900 crew. What are they still renting for, about $1K? Subtract for the rest of your gear and time and hassle of the pick-up and drop-off and you're almost losing money if you're not an owner/operator.
My point was that they are saying that if you owned that camera(or one of the other approved variants that do both) that they will only pay an SD rate if it's for an SD shoot, even though it is an HD camera with HD glass, but a rental house isn't gonna discount an HD camera even though its only being used for SD. I think it's a waste to buy an HD camera to shoot mostly SD, but I also think it's a waste buying any flavor of an SD only camera, too... Unless you're getting a stupid amount of work to justify it and pay it off in a year(or sooner). I know budgets are tight and shrinking and Network news is in the crapper, but I think anyone at the network making a conscious decision to NOT shoot in HD right now at the very least, for something that will be/can be/ may be used in the future, is very near sighted. I've done shoots during the last two years that were originally planned as SD shoots, but I started looking at what we were gonna be shooting and knew that this was footage that was going be used again and again, and some of it was going to have historical importance, so I pushed to shoot it in HD, even though it was going to be fed back and aired that day only in SD. Yes, they paid an HD rate for what was an SD product THAT day, but they also got a permanent HD archive of everything except the live shots.
Last edited: