Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Sexy low budget video that looks like a high $$ production

Status
Not open for further replies.
I fail to see how anyone was screwed over here - it's obvious that he spent time and effort, not money to get the final result. The performers/contibutors got themselves a video, and more than likely supplied all the costumes themselves (check out their websites, and it's clear that they already have the clothes), the director did all/most the post production on his own gear in his own property or easily accessible public property, maybe paying for the little bare stage, a few lights, and the green screen (although that was maybe small enough to have fitted in a room in his house).

It's ridiculous to tar him with the same brush as people who cynically exploit people for their own financial gain while doing very little work themselves. This video is a promo for all involved, but it probably won't make any money for him. What it's saying is that good and cheap are possible with a lot of pre-planning time, willing and hard work replacing fast in the "good/cheap/fast - pick any two" equation.
 
Rob Ruffo said:
It's one thing to say "everyone was paid fairly, and we did it for $2000 (or whatever number) because our clever concept was shootable in 3 hours with almost no post and we were so mega-organized" and another altogether to brag about your ability to exploit people and not pay them - and this includes rental shops, costume suppliers, etc. Why should they go bankrupt for you?
Click to expand...

You know Rob, although your wording was harsh, I actually see now where you're coming from and must concede your point. I think it's great when people can scrounge and motivate and inspire others to create something they believe in, but saying that they made I for $2000 is misleading. It is definitely implying that they could make something even more spectacular for $10k, when we all know that their project was built entirely on the good will of others.
This has been a surprisingly eye-opening exchange.
 
Of course he doesn't need to spend money on costume, hair, make up, location andwhatnot, because it was already there. Didn't you see that?
I guess he has his own camera and at least a basic light kit that covers most of the scenes without extra rentals. Are you gonna blame him for that?

After all it was only a promo video for a group of hobby chorus girls.

Come on guys get real. No serious producer would actually expect, to get the same price on a normal commercial or music video, unless the producer is willing to provide costumes, hair, makeup, location, props, girls and other stuff.

This is so obvious, I can not believe that you actually lament about that.

You can do things like that very cheap if you are creative.
The problem is that a lot of people in the industry are totally spoiled by multi million budgets, the don't had to be creative for years, they just buy or rent whatever they need. No questions asked.

But you guys may want to head over to Vincent Laforets Blog where the Producer and Director of that flick, Dan Bkank says some words on that production and budget.

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2010/09/30/fast-cheap-good/#more-4204

Frank
 
It should also be noted that the original poster of this thread is not the director of this video!
 
Oh no, not a low budget production!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Mariachi

Pay what you can; then beg, steal, borrow or pimp your grannie: just get it done. This is as old as the hills.

And Ruffo, give the cast and crew some credit, not everyone is as green and as desperate as you like to think. And then you bitch because it was shot on a 7D, isn't that a bit contradictory? Should the filmmaker have spent everything and denied even more values to use a higher end camera?

I'm certain that those who gave their talents did it knowingly, and their faith was well placed.
 
Have there been any official complaints from the cast and crew? Has anyone asked R Ruffo to champion their cause because they feel they have been duped and are not capable of making their own case? Are there grounds for any of this vicious whining in the face of a pretty creative low budget production? I, and many of my friends, have donated countless hours to similarly strapped productions, knowing full well that these same productions, whether music video, short and feature films, would very likely compete in major film festivals and world class venues. That these films would very possibly go on to make money. Best years of my life.
 
Produced for under $2k is misleading anyway...

I've been involved in my share of no-budget shorts. The truth is that somebody is getting paid somewhere. It's just not out of pocket. You have to get people to the shoot, but they pay for their gas and transportation. People have to eat, but they pay the restaurant. You have to shoot on something, and somebody paid for the camera. And the post, and the lights, and the vfx, etc, etc....

The difference is that a real production makes an attempt to account for all of the corollary costs of production, and makes an effort to provide fair compensation so people don't actually end up paying to work on a project. I'll work on a project because I care, sure. But don't ask me to give my time, and pay to work on the project with hidden costs.

Great job with the video, but I've got to side with Rob on this one, don't mislead folks about the true costs. Those favors only come by once in a while, and you can't build a business on them.
 
Frank Glencairn said:
Of course he doesn't need to spend money on costume, hair, make up, location andwhatnot, because it was already there. Didn't you see that?
I guess he has his own camera and at least a basic light kit that covers most of the scenes without extra rentals. Are you gonna blame him for that?

After all it was only a promo video for a group of hobby chorus girls.

Come on guys get real. No serious producer would actually expect, to get the same price on a normal commercial or music video, unless the producer is willing to provide costumes, hair, makeup, location, props, girls and other stuff.

This is so obvious, I can not believe that you actually lament about that.

You can do things like that very cheap if you are creative.
The problem is that a lot of people in the industry are totally spoiled by multi million budgets, the don't had to be creative for years, they just buy or rent whatever they need. No questions asked.

But you guys may want to head over to Vincent Laforets Blog where the Producer and Director of that flick, Dan Bkank says some words on that production and budget.

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2010/09/30/fast-cheap-good/#more-4204

Frank
Click to expand...

Many clients hear about these things, and then expect the ridiculous, you would be surprised.

Its' fine to help out a friend with your own camera as a free loan to a shoot (if he's really a friend)- but not to brag about it like "this is what I can do with $2000"- then how is it that you pay off your camera? How do we pay off our cameras? It is not cool if production becomes something just for people with rich uncles, with other people unable to financially compete or survive.

Spoilt!? Really!? On what planet does 20 hour days make me spoilt!? Or years and years of University then apprenticeship. I paid my dues - along with all these "spoilt" people you imagine, and you know what? Yes we do want something more than what the average DVX user gets because we've invested and risked so much more than he or she has.

And to say that Hollywood DPs - or higher budget music video and advert DPs/directors like me are not creative is deeply offensive - you mean to say that David Mullen is less creative than whatever 7D-user shot that video? Really? Only people with no money are creative? Do you really think we just sit on our asses and mindlessly order the whole rental house? Have you ever actually been on a high-end set!?
 
Bill Anderson said:
Oh no, not a low budget production!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Mariachi

Pay what you can; then beg, steal, borrow or pimp your grannie: just get it done. This is as old as the hills.

And Ruffo, give the cast and crew some credit, not everyone is as green and as desperate as you like to think. And then you bitch because it was shot on a 7D, isn't that a bit contradictory? Should the filmmaker have spent everything and denied even more values to use a higher end camera?

I'm certain that those who gave their talents did it knowingly, and their faith was well placed.
Click to expand...

Faith is great. Bragging about how many people you did not pay is not.
 
Bill Anderson said:
Have there been any official complaints from the cast and crew? Has anyone asked R Ruffo to champion their cause because they feel they have been duped and are not capable of making their own case? Are there grounds for any of this vicious whining in the face of a pretty creative low budget production? I, and many of my friends, have donated countless hours to similarly strapped productions, knowing full well that these same productions, whether music video, short and feature films, would very likely compete in major film festivals and world class venues. That these films would very possibly go on to make money. Best years of my life.
Click to expand...

I am complaining on behalf of MY crews - I have to defend their salaries to clients, who can easily turn around and hire proud exploiters like these guys.
 
Rob... I do get your point, and I think we all do. But as it was said before, there are projects, that simply wouldn't have been made if they weren't made out of favour, or fun. So they really don't affect the proffesional market, cause they wouldn't have been part of it in the first place. The possibilty that someone can get big with this kind of favours and even without years of experience can get an competitor and soon will charge the and work in the same league that you do, is something everyone will need to hold up to, with passionate and professional work. And for me that is what makes filmmaking these times so exciting. Anyone could do it, but its about how you do it...
 
Kim Frank said:
Rob... I do get your point, and I think we all do. But as it was said before, there are projects, that simply wouldn't have been made if they weren't made out of favour, or fun. So they really don't affect the proffesional market, cause they wouldn't have been part of it in the first place. The possibilty that someone can get big with this kind of favours and even without years of experience can get an competitor and soon will charge the and work in the same league that you do, is something everyone will need to hold up to, with passionate and professional work. And for me that is what makes filmmaking these times so exciting. Anyone could do it, but its about how you do it...
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with this at all. This is a good thing - it's only the budget bragging I have a problem with - just to be clear.
 
Rob Ruffo said:
I don't disagree with this at all. This is a good thing - it's only the budget bragging I have a problem with - just to be clear.
Click to expand...

Yes I get that... I try to avoid it aswell. Something is good or it isn't. It's not important how much budget it had.
 
Rob Ruffo said:
- you mean to say that David Mullen is less creative than whatever 7D-user shot that video? Really? Only people with no money are creative? ...Have you ever actually been on a high-end set!?
Click to expand...

No but David doesn´t have to shoot in his own dining room, because otherwise the whole film can´t be made, does he?
I hope you get the idea now.

And yeah, I been on those "high end sets" and I was shocked how much money they burn there. Not because it rally adds something to the film, but just because they can.

Rob Ruffo said:
I don't disagree with this at all. This is a good thing - it's only the budget bragging I have a problem with - just to be clear.
Click to expand...

chough, chough, quote from Robert Ruffo´s own Exposureroom site chough!

"Bits and pieces of music videos and adverts to give you an idea of my directing style, and the very complex set-ups which I was able to pull off despite budgets which were far from always high."

http://exposureroom.com/members/RobertRuffo/085d9678b35b42e28222e80a2de12abf/

@Kim I´m with you, thou I think the budget makes a difference. Just because it takes a lot of more creativity and balls to pull something of a small budget than a big budget (given the output is the same) - and creativity and balls impresses me, producing the next most expensive movie of all times doesn´t.

For example: Which guy would you respect more? A famous formula 1 racing driver, that has a giant million dollar industry in his back, with all those high tech engineers, mechanics and computer controlled stuff ?
Or the kid that hops up his own motor and builds his own hot rod, together with a little enthusiastic crew and even hauls that jalopy to the salt flats with his dads truck by himself - and than wins it all in his own class and league?

Frank
 
Last edited:
Two things here...

1. The bragging about a $2000 productions is just stupid. 5 years ago to produce a video that looked like that you would need $500k in gear alone. Now everywhere I go, every talentless wannabe hip-hop/R&B artist expect you to give them a Hype William's look for $200. Please stop ruining the production economy.

2. The comments like "That was painfully obvious it was a 7D" are the most jealous asshole comments ever. That looked almost 5x's better than anything shot on the original mysterium (excluding resolution)... and, yes, especially in the exposure department. I'll put money that the 7D has a better exposure range than the an original mysterium. Yes, RAW is obviously better, and the compression really crunches allot of the mid-tones... but overall, I guarantee the 7D sensor physically captures more light on the far-ends of the spectrum, especially blacks. Don't believe me... Look at 1:47 - 1:53... That's some dynamic range for you. Nothing captures an image like that except for Red, F35, DSLRs, and Film. Notice the finger prints and filament of the bulbs...

If someone posted this as Red footage... people would be going nuts over the image. Honestly, you should have said this was MX footage... Nobody would have been able to tell (at this resolution). The final reveal of it being shot on a 7D would have been funny as hell. So don't worry too much man, people are only posting negative comments because the image looks so good.

But seriously, people, don't make stuff that looks like this for $2000... It would have been better to have not charged anything for this production and just said it was a demo-reel and then next time tell them $20-grand or no video. No matter what your highly-subjective and extremely jealousy-filled opinion on DSLR's are, you have to agree, these cams in talented hands are no joke. They look like expensive as f#$&... So don't be charging pennies for these images. Even if that's what it costs.

Good job on the production though... The song isn't the catchiest and defiantly won't find it's way to the radio or pop charts... but the video did it justice.
 
Whoa - this discussion has gone sour.

This is not the way redusers should behave.

Basically, remember: behave like you are in a pub. In a pub, where people sort of know each other, they do have their arguments, but they stay decent. And they try to stay on topic.

Please, this thread is of such general subject, with no connection to RED cameras, so do continue this discussion at DVXuser.

Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top