No, really. I swear I can get all that done for the budget.

         

"Wire shots are accomplished a few minutes at a time so the talent can be lowered to prevent gangrene of the leg from setting in."

I can't tell if this is a joke or not. GANGRENE?! What, are all people who do wire shots long-term bed-ridden diabetics who already have a foot about to fall off?

         

It seems like there was an epidemic of videos getting binned and reshot last year. I may be wrong but that appears to have abated as of late. Perhaps commissioners, EP's and directors are becoming more pragmatic - I certainly have.

         

lots of good thoughts in this article. i believe a lot of the problem is that labels are not generally willing to develop an idea or work on an idea with a director for a few days to hone it in and "Get it." So the only alternative for a director who wants to land something is to find a way to scream off the page, "look at me." I'd be much more willing to write subtle, perfectly articulated ideas if there was more feedback coming from the label.

also, sorry but this part is funny to me: " I have seen concepts with the artist photographed in dozens of different cities, but minus any explanation how or why the artist and the director would take months out of their lives to shoot this multi-state concept for under forty-thousand. "

-- i shot exactly this pitch for WELL under 10k, and i think it turned out pretty well. Luckily, the project was a single bid that i brought directly to the artist via a very supportive label.

         

fam - You can't tell if it was a joke?!? Man, I must suck at this.

aem - How did you travel this artist from place to place? Where there hotels involved? Where did the stylists stay? What about the rest of the band/group? Was there a 'video village' for the commissioner in each city? Congrats on getting it to work, good luck selling it the labels I deal with.

         

Ugh. I'm sorry -- I really couldn't tell. I was just like, "WHAT is he talking about??"

         

haha thanks 30f. well, the fact is, there was no stylist, no video village, no nothing. i flew to the city where the artists lived, i stayed in there house one night, and then we spent a week driving together in their car. we stayed in hotels for two night but the rest of the time i made them drive through the nights, alternating who slept and who drove. we made it from tennessee to new orleans to oklahoma to texas to arkansas and more. i had never met them before, but i felt like it would work, and it did. we all agreed to do it because it seemed like a crazy rad idea that would work only because we could completely commit to it.

which is entirely the point of me responding to your article with this story. there is absolutely no money to shoot music videos. my example above is an extreme example, and just for context, yes i have shot 6 figure videos with teams of stylists, and video villages, and lovely catering. and i've also done this zero budget insanity. I have also at other points in my career sold a tv show, sold a movie, and worked for many advertising and marketing companies. so i'm not trying to live in a basement and make everything out of cardboard. but every time i get sent a track to write on, i am so excited by the possibilities of doing another cool video project. that is the only reason i ever shoot videos , because i love doing them and want to make something great.

when you get these treatments that make you roll your eyes, i wish you would think about the intentions behind them. Maybe someone has a pretty good idea of how to get the wire work to happen on a budget, or how to get the band to the top of a church roof -- maybe you sacrifice one aspect of the polished look in order to show the band in an exciting, risky way. seriously, call the kid up and ask him how he wants to do it. There's guys out there in garages now who can make freakin' district 9 happen on their laptops, for free. 40 grand will get you pretty far if you go where the heart is.

(i also have to point out -- so many briefs i read that come from labels say they are looking for something with "a unique look or style, an amazing visual trick or lens," or "something exciting that makes the band look amazing". all that sounds like to me is "spend as much money as possible on the visual aspect." but don't forget to have a unique idea. that's also safe.)

(why don't i ever get briefs that say "we're looking for a foundation that will allow our artist to express an interesting emotion or an unexpected side of their personality"?)

If you're only prepared to spend 30k on a video, how important can it be to your marketing plan? seriously? if its such a monetarily low priority, why not just universally choose the craziest, most impossible treatment and see what happens? I'd always rather see someone fail big than see someone try really hard not to look stupid, surrounded by anamorphic flares.

I wasn't even doing this stuff back when there was money in it, so i'm not longing for some byegone day. I feel like some labels haven't let go of what they wish it would be. BUT since we all have such insanely limited budgets, it's like, do we want to spend the money on the very best high quality video villages and stylists? or can we shoot things that look less glossy but which maybe capture some really cool ideas? I feel like our audience appreciates the latter, when they can get it. if you blow your whole budget getting the band to the top of the church roof and shooting it pretty well, but maybe not with an anamorphic tilt shift lens on 35mm film, the audience might appreciate how badass the band is for giving it a shot; as opposed to shooting them in a small soundstage with a great lens, a great colorist, and no risks at all

somewhere along the way the idea got baked into music videos that they are supposed to look like the most glamorous glitziest things on the planet. most videos put much more into how they look than movies do -- despite the fact that movies make money.

We all - the directors, the commissioners, the producers, the artists -- we all want to do something meaningful and interesting every time we take on a project -- let's all work together to be creative.

         

aem - you and I are kind of on the same page here. The key is choosing which part of it (look, effects, scale of locations, etc) you are going to focus on. If I see a treatment for a low budget job where the director insists he is going to focus on all of those aspects and they will all be world-class, I think he is either delusional or a liar. Neither one of those makes me want to work with them. It certainly doesn't make me want to call him up and ask him how he is going to pull it off - since it seems clear he has no idea. And I will add that a director wanting to work very much should write his treatments in a way that doesn't require a lot of extra effort from the people commissioning the job.

The 'district 9 on their laptop' guy cannot make there be more than nine hours of darkness for that rooftop shoot - unless they have the 'turn summer into winter' software added in there. No technique can make Crouching Tiger-esque wire work happen all in one day if the artist has to look good and sing at the same time. Can you swing the singer haphazardly around on wires for a few hours? Sure, but promising that it will be the next level technique and looking gorgeous at the same time is - like I said, the mark of a mentally unstable person or a liar.

Almost every director I speak with is full of promises that this thing or that thing that seems impossible based on the schedule or money can truly be done as needed. Those promises start to sound like 'the check is in the mail' rather quickly. As Jason noted - throwing away just one already shot video because it doesn't look right is enough for any label/prod co to scale back on the whole 'believing the hype.'

As an artist it is great that YOU would rather see people try big and fail - but people spending their own money (bands) or a good chunk of their yearly budget (labels) are likely to see that very differently.

I think the addendum on this post applies to this issue: 30frames.blogspot.com

         

yep, i agree. that "construction" post totally applies. and the fact is, i tend to dislike most of the videos i see. i guess just thinking it would be cool if directors and labels could come up with a bit more of a creative unity about what we're all trying to achieve and what the coolest way to go about it could be. maybe there's some people doing this but it hasn't happened around me.

i do appreciate you opening up the discussion, for sure.

i spend a good bit of my time pitching to and developing with movie companies; that experience is much more collaborative and, well successful creatively. i've always wondered why labels work so differently.

         

@ Adam Egypt.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the working process of making videos, it's a valid reason why this site is good. It's a good discussion.