Pay less than union rates.
Don't pay at all.

I can shoot an entire feature, paying everyone, for
$100,000. 12 days of prep, 18 days shooting and
24 days post. That's $1,850 per day.

I've shot features for $5,000.
I've shot features in the $60,000 to $80,000 range
- paying everyone.

I'm currently prepping a feature with a $275,000
budget. Almost identical shooting schedule. That
will come out to $5,000 per day.

DGA rates for a director on a TV series is $5,285
per day.

You come up with a number and someone has made
a movie for that amount.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

So why the difference in cost? Aside from compromising on quality, that is.

When you have a crew of 10 paying each of them $50 per day the
cost will be less than a crew of 20 paying $200 per day. A TV
series shooting with union cast and crew is going to cost even
more. That's the difference in costs. There is also the equipment,
locations, sound stages and perks. Independent filmmakers don't
usually have these expenses. Renting a camera, lighting/grip,
audio, trucks, dressing rooms can add up quickly. Indies don't do
that. Even those that do (I always rent) rent for fewer days and
use less equipment.

A really good example is the discussion we had a while back of
special effects. You can hire a team that has experience and will
deliver excellent product but will cost a lot. You can use a team
of dedicated first timers who are willing to work for free and might
also deliver excellent product.

That's the difference in cost. And you take a chance on quality.

Well, I don't want to take advantage of juniors, who have to work for free, because I once had to work for peanuts, and, in one job, I didn't get fully paid. In fact, the New York Times has an article about how unpaid internships may be illegal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/03/business/03intern.html?scp=10&sq=minimum%20wage&st=Search

Even if free labor didn't violate minimum-wage laws, I still don't want to do that to people. So I'll have to pay at least minimum wage, and, for an all-day shoots, provide snacks.

So you can see why there is a difference in cost between a movie
paying skilled professionals union rates and paying dedicated
amateurs minimum wage.

Here in California the minimum wage is $8.00/hr. For a 12 hour day
(here in Los Angeles a shoot day is typically 12 hours) that would
be $112 per day. A crew of 15 will be $1,680 per day in salary
only. An 18 day shoot - $30,240. Salaries only. And thats if you
pay everyone, even the director, producer and DP minimum wage.

As I mentioned, a DGA director gets $5,285 per day. More than a 15
person crew per day when you pay minimum wage.

If a DGA director gets over $5 grand per day, then he would be making over a million a year, net. Does he?

If he works over 200 days per year; he does.

quote:

---

Originally posted by certified instigator

If he works over 200 days per year; he does.

---

Meaning that most directors don't work full time?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aspiring mogul

quote:

---

Originally posted by certified instigator

If he works over 200 days per year; he does.

---

Meaning that most directors don't work full time?

---

No. Directors who work on movies and episodics and music videos aren't "on staff" like that. Most everyone in the industry is a freelancer so as jobs come up, you take them. The job may last a single day or four months. Then there may be a week until the next job or six months if things are really slow.

For a Director, he'll have a few months of pre-production, a few months of production, and another few months of post-production. After that project is over, that Director may not get another project to Direct for months or years. Most Directors may only ever direct five to ten movies in their lifetime. Some feature Directors fill their "off time" by directing commercials. Only a very few Directors seem to work "full time," but they really don't. But those few earn far beyond the DGA minimums so they are able to afford long stretches of unemployment.

This is just one of the things that aspiring "filmmakers" need to truly understand before setting on the path to build a career in the film industry. Very few people, particularly those who work on set in production or off set during post-production, just "get a job" and keep it. You're employed for the duration of that project and then you are unemployed until someone else calls you for something else. And not everyone works for the full project. Day-players are common. This is when a movie/project has a big day with a big stunt or lots of extras and they need extra crew and cast for a limited amount of time, perhaps a day or a few days in the midst of the rest of the schedule. You might be sitting at home, hoping for work, when the phone rings and someone asks you to come in for a couple days.

Directors typically don't work that way as they will be hired to do the entire project. But for that reason, they have to earn more per project because they don't have the opportunity to fill in the days of unemployment with small day jobs like the rest of the crew can.

For a bit more about ways those in the industry try to get around paying people, take a look at this recent article: ?url? http://realfilmcareer.com/?p=3581?/url?

Brian Dzyak
Cameraman/Author
IATSE Local 600, SOC
http://www.whatireallywanttodo.com
http://www.realfilmcareer.com

Yes, I'm familiar with this kind of scam - work for someone glamorous, and he doesn't pay you.

I'm seriously thinking of making this a hobby, as in changing my name to aspiring indie producer, as opposed to aspiring mogul. Perhaps my dream is silly after all. 🙁

In the old, "golden" years of movie studio system, everyone was a full-time employee of a movie studio, which included actors, directors, writers, editors, cinematographers, all other crew. You'd get a salary for the duration of your contract (which would stretch over several years), and you'd show up for work when called. You had one hell of a job security back there, but couldn't quite sell yourself to the highest bidder, if you were extremely successful. The system is long gone and in Hollywood, hardly anyone is still a full-time creative staff anywhere.

Theoretically, though, if a DGA director could possibly find himself work for a full year without a break, then yes, he'd be making over a million in that year. I can't think of a director capable of working that long without a break, though.

I would have thought that directors can always get steady work doing commercials or industry films.

Your dream isn't silly. It's going to be difficult to reach.

All good dreams are.

You didn't think - going in - that it was going to be easy, did you?

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

In general, no matter what field of work one looks at, there is only ONE specific trait that is common among ALL the people who are truly successful: it is perseverance. You really can only succeed if you relentlessly keep trying. This automatically means you need to devote every minute of your free time to your goal (whether it is filmmaking, building a restaurant chain, an online music rental business, a self-help fitness empire, or ANY imaginable kind of business or personal venture). So, that one common trait is essentially two: perseverance and hard work.

This stuff has been said zillions of times in many situations, to the point of being trivial and sounding lame and cliché. It really isn't. When you carefully examine careers of successful writer/directors in Hollywood, there will be very few of them who had fame fall into their lap by sheer luck. ALL others busted their ?$$es working, working, working, trying and then trying again, until they caught a tiny bit of a break. Spending a lot of time in online forums undoubtedly provides valuable learning, but it may also postpone any real action and movement towards one's goal. If one is to succeed, one MUST actually keep trying. It just doesn't happen any other way.