Editor Rates?

[Roberto Lequeux]

I could use some help please.

How much could you secure a good editor for? One with just a few features on his belt.

And is a total amount for the whole job a common thing?

No grading, VFX, audio, just straight cutting. There would be pro-mixed tracks on the footage. I could provide a new top end work station with proper monitoring on a big screen and a Red Rocket.

 

[M Most]

I could use some help please.

How much could you secure a good editor for? One with just a few features on his belt.

And is a total amount for the whole job a common thing?

Assuming you really mean a good, experienced editor and not just somebody who happens to own a Final Cut system....

Union scale for an on-call editor on an single independent production under the low budget agreement (which is for $1.5 million to a bit over $4 million) is currently about $2650 per week (usually a 56 hour week) plus fringes. For an under $1.5 million production, the figure is not actually specified, and it's listed as "subject to negotiation." I would say that anywhere between $2000 and $2500 per week would be reasonable, but it really depends on how hungry editors are when you happen to need them. If it were right now, you could probably get away with a lower figure. If it's in the future, who knows where things will be. It should be noted that the IA just signed a 3 year agreement, so those figures will only go up about 3% per year.

You should also be aware that any experienced editor will assume that you're also going to have an assistant editor, so if you're not, and you're asking them to be a one man or one woman band, that should be taken into account.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Thank you Most! Your posts are always very much appreciated.

I plan to work with them, and would not mind performing the assistant editor duties at all. No shame in doing the leg work.

We will likely be under the low budget agreement, but I do want the editor to have a genuine smile on their face. Having edited about a thousand hours myself, so far, I understand the importance of a good cut all too well. Editing is the equivalent to theater's rehearsals.

I wonder how long it would take for a 96min feature, with a decent shoot ratio, decent notes, marked shots, etc..?

I could review all the footage and log it before he became involved... but the main benefit I see is having fresh, trained, unattached eyes on said footage.

I wish I could afford him though production plus several weeks.

Would you say that 10-12 weeks, total, might be enough under these conditions?

 

[Joyfool]

Thank you Most! Your posts are always very much appreciated.

I plan to work with them, and would not mind performing the assistant editor duties at all. No shame in doing the leg work.

We will likely be under the low budget agreement, but I do want the editor to have a genuine smile on their face. Having edited about a thousand hours myself, so far, I understand the importance of a good cut all too well. Editing is the equivalent to theater's rehearsals.

I wonder how long it would take for a 96min feature, with a decent shoot ratio, decent notes, marked shots, etc..?

I could review all the footage and log it before he became involved... but the main benefit I see is having fresh, trained, unattached eyes on said footage.

I wish I could afford him though production plus several weeks.

Would you say that 10-12 weeks, total, might be enough under these conditions?

right now you can get an experienced editor for 1000/wk. A newbie will do it for as little as 500/wk. Assembling a first cut will take 4 to 6 wks (depending on assistance). But you'll probably need 3 cuts to nail down a final. Keep in mind these rates will change as productions gear up. And at these rates you may lose your editor to a better paying job (they'll usually tell you upfront that if something comes up they'll jump ship for bigger dollars). I'm at the tail end of the first cut and this has been my experience thus far (in LA).

best of luck.

 

[Liam Hall]

right now you can get an experienced editor for 1000/wk. A newbie will do it for as little as 500/wk.

$500 a week, good grief!! That's way less than most guys day rate in London. I guess LA is suffering from over-saturation.

 

[Joyfool]

$500 a week, good grief!! That's way less than most guys day rate in London. I guess LA is suffering from over-saturation.

yes it's a bloodbath these days. but 500 is newbie rate.

 

[Liam Hall]

yes it's a bloodbath these days. but 500 is newbie rate.

Wow. That's not good for the industry. Mind you, I started on £35 (about $45) a week - not telling you when though

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Wow. That's not good for the industry. Mind you, I started on £35 (about $45) a week - not telling you when though

You are hired! :sifone:

Seriously though, I can edit up a small storm. I am no virtuoso, (yet! ) but I can say that I know what I am doing already. So, I definitely want someone I consider a far better editor than me, hopefully by a long shot if I can afford it.

I am not intimidated by the length of a feature, and would do it myself. However, I don't want to go from god knows how much pre-production, writing, re-writing, re-writing, re-writing and then shooting for 8 weeks... straight to the edit room with a head that will unfortunately be filled with pre-conceptions, memories, attachments...

I hope I am so lucky to work with a true story teller. Definitely someone who has edited a few successful movies, or at least movies that have a beautiful pace. You know what I am talking about.

Definitely someone here in LA, with nothing but the script and a few good conversations with me. Then he'll start getting HDDs in the mail. And I'll start salivating a river waiting for h.264's!

If you guys have a better suggestion on how to go about the meetings/discussions and the collaboration during production, please, do share!!

 

[Ed Watkins]

right now you can get an experienced editor for 1000/wk. A newbie will do it for as little as 500/wk.

$1000 a week, really?

I had a hell of a time finding half decent editors here in DC willing to work for $400 a day ($2,000 a week) a couple of months back.

Maybe I should have been looking in LA.

 

[M Most]

right now you can get an experienced editor for 1000/wk.

Define "experienced."

 

[Michael Lindsay]

Define "experienced."

not very! ....or not good!

I don't believe you can get a, obvious by experience, great/good editor for $1000. He/she may be great but is struggling to prove it OR they are not great but have a lot of experience.

just my opinion hope it doesn't offend..

Michael L

 

[Joyfool]

$1000 a week, really?

I had a hell of a time finding half decent editors here in DC willing to work for $400 a day ($2,000 a week) a couple of months back.

Maybe I should have been looking in LA.

we met with several tv editors and folks with a couple of features under their belts. Also many editors who assisted on many big productions. Those folks were more than happy to take 1k/wk. The main dilema was getting commitment for the entire edit. It's hard to expect someone who normally gets 2500/wk to stick with a project at such a low rate. Most were straight up with us saying that if a higher paying gig came up they'd have to take it. The fact is many people are still out of work at least that was the case 6 weeks ago. It does seem like business is picking up very slightly but I think you can still find discount rates. You just have to ask. As a producer you can't be shy to low ball if that's all you have. Managing everyone's expectations has been my top priority.


edit: My comments aren't meant to be negative or offensive to editors. I have a high level of respect for editors as the "second director" of the picture. My comments are meant as nothing more than a reflection of the times we're in. Many people are out of work and financing is difficult to come by. peace.

 

[Rick Darge]

$800 a day or $3,000 a week..

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Richard, did you read my posts? I think you might have, but I am just asking cause I don't expect everyone to read my walls of text.

Thanks JoyFool for your post. It really helps. I am sure people aren't taking it bad, and good news is that business IS picking up. Good news for me as well, and at the same time probably not so good for my budget.

 

[michael zaletel]

There is no shame for even an experienced editor taking a pay-cut instead of unemployment when times are tough. Some of these editors might have families to feed and bills to pay. I rarely work for less than $100/hr on anything anymore but if I was completely out of work, I'd probably work for $100 a week if it meant feeding my kids. Please don't make the respectable professionals that are having to do whatever they can to survive right now feel bad, lesser or like a sell-out for working for much less than the going rate. This is temporary, better times will come but if you aren't working, don't let your pride keep you from taking that embarrasingly low-paying gig for a bit to help pay your bills. There is no shame and remember that the people who will give you a hard time for working for so little won't pay your bills while you hold out for more.

-michael zaletel
(shooter)

 

[Tim Whitcomb]

Richard, did you read my posts? I think you might have, but I am just asking cause I don't expect everyone to read my walls of text.

Thanks JoyFool for your post. It really helps. I am sure people aren't taking it bad, and good news is that business IS picking up. Good news for me as well, and at the same time probably not so good for my budget.

Hi Roberto- I always enjoy your posts, especially as I think you hold the record on a per thread basis

I agree with most on here, save many times in my humble experience a creative position like DP, Editor, Art Dept etc... will guage their "low pay threshold" on the merits of the project itself.

Portland, OR, where I come from has quite a few experienced (5 years min)
commercial editors ...very talented... but with a scant sprinkling of features under their belts... and most miss the opportunity to work on something
more substantive than a Nike or Intel spot.

So if the commercial work is slow or they have a nest egg built up, they may not care so much for the rate (so long as they can pay bills) as much as the opportunity to work on a feature... especially if its a story they relate to or are excited about...

imho CONTENT is king... write a great script and the talent will come.
but I also compensate my peeps on the back end so if the movie miraculously sells, they will make MORE than the IA scale.

its all about Risk reward ... and since 99.99% dont make a dime,
its much more risk...

that said, I highly encourage you to get whomever you hire involved as EARLY AS POSSIBLE
in the process., even if they are not cutting on set... so they arent
walking in blind... the latter can result in more $ than paying IA rate.

thats my 1.2 cents (adjusted for the recession)

EDIT: I also encourage you to SAVE as much $ for post as you can. because I will argue that POST is where the movie is made... not on set.
SO MANY low budget filmmakers blow their wad in the "content acquisition" phase.. i.e. shooting,
that they inevitably leave themselves short for post. Look at your budget and Cut the production down . there is always room... and SAVE $ for post, that is the best advice I ever got and always give.
so you CAN hire a pro.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Hi Roberto- I always enjoy your posts, especially as I think you hold the record on a per thread basis

My humble apologies to you and everyone else. :bows:
I have very little life and a burning desire to manifest a vision.

Portland, OR, where I come from has quite a few experienced (5 years min)
commercial editors ...very talented... but with a scant sprinkling of features under their belts... and most miss the opportunity to work on something
more substantive than a Nike or Intel spot.

I am hoping I might meet with a few guys out of Minneapolis, watch their reels and have a few cups of coffee. I can probably stay up there for the cut... it it is OK with my executive. He loves Minneapolis, most likely has family still up there.

that said, I highly encourage you to get whomever you hire involved as EARLY AS POSSIBLE
in the process., even if they are not cutting on set... so they arent
walking in blind... the latter can result in more $ than paying IA rate.

Indeed!

EDIT: I also encourage you to SAVE as much $ for post as you can. because I will argue that POST is where the movie is made... not on set.
SO MANY low budget filmmakers blow their wad in the "content acquisition" phase.. i.e. shooting,
that they inevitably leave themselves short for post. Look at your budget and Cut the production down . there is always room... and SAVE $ for post, that is the best advice I ever got and always give.
so you CAN hire a pro.

ATM I am thinking about about ~20-25% for post, but lots of that 80% is geared for making post easy... sound! That is the other area so many people neglect.

Thank you for your patience Tim :thumbsup:

 

[michael zaletel]

Half on the script, the other half on post.

-michael zaletel
(shooter)

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Half on the script, the other half on post.

-michael zaletel
(shooter)

Half? Come on Shooter... give me a real number, not what your pockets want to hear. :sifone:

But I guess this is useless without disclosing a budget. Which I can't do.

 

[Joyfool]

....ATM I am thinking about about ~20-25% for post, but lots of that 80% is geared for making post easy... sound! That is the other area so many people neglect.

I hear ya brother! Sound Sound Sound. Picture be damned! Yeah I said it. I can crap on the screen and call it art but if I have hot sound everybody and their sister will call me out....So in an effort to mitigate my risk I made sure to hire a seasoned (union) sound crew. Alas the variables of the production proved to much for them to handle. Still ended up with quite a bit of hot sound and I'm looking at a day of adr. Yuck. The worst part is having to negotiate actor contracts. You know those 100/day contracts they signed when the movie was a figment of my imagination? Something tells me they're gonna (or rather their agents) resist...