Question for Mr. Mullen

[Brian Wells]

Oh, believe me.. I stay informed of productions in the area, at least independent film happenings.

I lived three minutes away from Keystone Twin Cinemas, okay!!

[David Mullen ASC]

I completely understand why rates on low-budget films are low for crew people. What I don't understand are low-budget filmmakers who resent the notion that crew people want to earn a decent living and live middle-class lives. It's one thing to feel sorry for not being able to pay people more -- it's another to think that these crew people don't deserve to make more.

[Patrick Neary]

oh there will be lots of pay, on our full slate of upcoming projects - so if you'll just do this one for nothing :angry: .....

[Michael Most]

This may offend some people, but I think people in the film business are very overpaid. No wonder hollywood needs $100,000,000 to make a movie 50% goes for crew.

 

Uhh, excuse me, but you're 17 years old and live in Indiana. You have absolutely no perspective on the subject. You have no conception of what life costs in Los Angeles, or, in all probability, Bloomington, for that matter. You may or may not have artistic talent, and you may or may not have directing talent, but simply by virtue of your age, you have no clue as to the true costs of adult life. You will when you're an adult. You don't now. Nor do you have any idea as to where budgets go in motion pictures. The percentage of the budget that goes to labor costs is far, far less than you seem to think it is. The primary reason for big budget pictures costing what they do is above the line and physical production costs, not below the line.

 

You're in way over your head here.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

For what it's worth, which isn't a lot, there's only two groups of people I've seen making a very nice porsche-owning living out of working on films - telecine colourists and Steadicam operators. In the latter case you've got the best part of a six-figure investment in equipment, but the rates are still somewhat disproportionate. And colourists... let's not even go there, when all you have to do is turn up and do it and someone else maintains the equipment for you, how can you fail to cash in!

 

Phil

[Rik Andino]

No offense, but $700 a day is a one hell of a price tag. I'd be happy if I was making $300.00 days, thats more than what pretty much any other job where you work for someone will pay.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's BS--Lawyers can make twice that amount before lunch...

My mother worked in a corporate law firm and senior lawyers earned $300 an hour

 

What many of you forget is cinematographers and directors and editors,

And on few rare occasion producers...are hard working professionals

And just like every other hard-working professional

They deserve a compentent wage.

 

Many doctors, accountants, and architetchs

Get what is considered outrageous salaries...and few complain...

Why can't film professionals?

 

Why do we have to get the same wages as plumbers and truck drivers...

Goddamnit we went to college! & we got outrageous loans to pay off...

 

So I don't complain I'd just congratulate those who made great wages...

And hope someday I were there too. :)

[Landon D. Parks]

*we went to college!

Correction, SOME of you went to college. Not everyone goes to college that's in the film industry. In fact, I once read in a book "The good thing about the film industry is this, that you can quit school at 16, be dumber than poop and still make more money than any of your college grad buddies."

 

I quote directly from one of the books I read a littlw while ago...

 

Nor do you have any idea as to where budgets go in motion pictures.

I'v seen a few budget breakdown reports for some hollywood films. I have some Idea where the budget goes! As to the 50% thing, I was using it to make a statement, not that every film pays 50% to its crew (Although the film I would like to make would budget $500,000 of the $1,000,000 just for the crew, and thats for a pretty small crew at standard rates.)

 

Maybe I should have shut up while I had the chance, because I'm not going to argue. I gave my opinion, if you don't like my opinion, don't bother to read it.

 

simply by virtue of your age, you have no clue as to the true costs of adult life.

Ha ha, the past year I have lived on my own. Payed my own bills, rent, ect. I got a job, I'v had my electric shut off for non payment of bills, don't think I need you to tell me that I have no prespective on what adult life is like! <_<

Edited June 9, 2005 by Landon D. Parks

[Brian Wells]

I once read a book that told me how to buy real estate with no money down and how to "flip" my investment property and earn a profit with lots of free time for vacation in the Florida keys... Does that mean it's true? Probably not. People will write all sorts of things to sell books. You'll learn to recognise the phonies as you get older. BTW, I think the book you read was a Hollywood tell-all on how to get into the circus performance industry.

 

But, don't fret.. I used to believe the same lies about becoming wealthy without education and without hard work, but they were only that: lies. Save yourself the trouble. All the big stories in the world won't get one anywhere. Hard work is the best investment one can make.

 

If you have indeed been paying your own way since you were 16, I'm sorry to hear that. That's a burden I never had to endure so young. Even the internet here gets pricey! I hope things start to work out well/better for you, Landon.

 

bw

Edited June 9, 2005 by Brian Wells

[Landon D. Parks]

I once read a book that told me how to buy real estate with no money down and how to "flip" my investment property and earn a profit with lots of free time for vacation in the Florida keys... Does that mean it's true? Probably not. People will write all sorts of things to sell books. You'll learn to recognise the phonies as you get older. BTW, I think the book you read was a Hollywood tell-all on how to get into the circus performance industry.

I think that advice was wise... and I do think that book was written by a very well off Hollywood director by the way, so I don't think it was full of crap. It's the truth you know! You don't need an education to work in the film business! Many directors / cinematographers / producers never went to film school, maybe even quit school @ 16, and yet are big in hollywood. This is one industry where if you have an artistic vision, and you can prove you are able to put it to work, thats all the "Education" most need. Although this is coming from a 16 year old with no life experiance, so don't listen to me by any means... It does help to have some education though I know, you can't very well come on to a film set not knowing what 2+2 is. But the point I was trying to make is, if you finnish high school at most, you got all the education you'll need. When it comes to film education, I have always been torn with the question of why someone would spend 4 years of there life and countless thousands of dollars on film school, when for thousands of dollars you can go out and make your own movie. I guess thats just my "Un-educated" opinion.

 

If you have indeed been paying your own way since you were 16, I'm sorry to hear that.

Well, don't be. It's not like I was kicked out or anything, I just wanted to live on my own, more or less for the reason that I hate living with my parents. In my opinion at 16 Im more than old enough to go out, get a job and make ends meet on your own without breaking mommy and daddy bank account till I'm 30. I guess I have just always thought living off someone elses money is like stealing, especially if you more than able to take care of yourself.

 

Plus I can stay out as late as I want, try that at 17 and still living with mommy and daddy!

Edited June 9, 2005 by Landon D. Parks

[Brian Wells]

You don't need an education to work in the film business! Many directors / cinematographers / producers never went to film school, maybe even quit school...

Any dropouts working in an intellectual industry are the exception, not the rule. I know only a single working working D.P. who didn't attend college, but has been shooting film for 42 years... plus, he markets himself as "the blue collar film worker" and receives plenty of work because of his niche'.

 

By and large, the successful guys have B.A.'s from well known first tier colleges and universities.

Many have their Master's degree as well.

[Brian Wells]

Plus I can stay out as late as I want, try that at 17 and still living with mommy and daddy!

Don't want to rain on your parade, but remember when I said I grew up in Indiana? I remember the law pretty well.

 

"Indiana's curfew law makes it a violation for children under 18 years of age to be in public places between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. on weeknights and 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. on weekends."

http://www.in.gov/legislative/hdpr/R09_03182004.html

Edited June 9, 2005 by Brian Wells

[Landon D. Parks]

"Indiana's curfew law makes it a violation for children under 18 years of age to be in public places between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. on weeknights and 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. on weekends."

I find that a bit hard to swollow... A lot of things are against the law, that dont mean poop from apple butter.

 

I also find it kind of strange it sais that no one under the age of 18 can be out after 11pm, so how can I work till 1:00am in the morning? Which I do more often than not (Legally)? Under this law, it would also mean that no one under age 18 can be out even with a parent ot guardian... so if where on family vacation and we are on our way home, we stop at McDonalds to get something to eat @ Midnight... OMG, I broke the law! :rolleyes: :huh: :blink:

 

I have never been stoped by anyone for being out after 11pm, no do I expt to in the future. Heck, you are not telling me its against the law for me to go see a movie alone at 11 at night.

 

Heck, however wrote this was on something good, If its such a law that children cant be out after 11pm, it sure is not enforced very much... Have you never seen a kid out after 11pm? I have! All the time, everywhere.

 

Something may be "The Law", that don't mean that it's scrictly enforced. The only time one should ever worry about getting in trouble for being out after hours is if they are taking part in something illegal, or just out wondering the streets with there gangs... Then they deserve to be cought!

 

PS) In the second place, its no worry for me, because in a few months I'll be Emancipated, because I'm getting married. I doubt this law will apply to me then anyway since I'll legally be 18.... And not under the control of my parents anymore.

Edited June 9, 2005 by Landon D. Parks

[Brian Wells]

PS) In the second place, its no worry for me, because in a few months I'll be Emancipated, because I'm getting married. I doubt this law will apply to me then anyway since I'll legally be 18.... And not under the control of my parents anymore.

 

In the state of Indiana a woman needs to be 18 or have written permission from her legal guardian to be wed and a man must be 21 or have written permission from his legal guardian. Like I said, I lived in the state for many years. Perhaps you could elope in N.C., I believe they'll waive the minimum age requirement.. I think, though I'm not certain. Regardless....

 

Since you seem to have a knack for memorizing facts well, I offer this:

The NIH brain research suggests that the problem is human biology. A crucial part of the teen's brain ? the area that peers ahead and considers consequences ? remains undeveloped. That means careless attitudes and rash emotions often drive teen decisions, says Jay Giedd, chief of brain imaging in the child psychiatric unit at the National Institute of Mental Health, who's leading the study.

 

"It all comes down to impulse control," Giedd says. "The brain is changing a lot longer than we used to think. And that part of the brain involved in decision-making and controlling impulses is among the latest to come on board."

 

The teen brain is a paradox. Some areas ? those that control senses, reactions and physical abilities ? are fully developed in teenagers. "Physically, they should be ruling the world," Giedd says. "But (adolescence) is not that great of a time emotionally."

 

Giedd and an international research team have analyzed 4,000 brain scans from 2,000 volunteers to document how brains evolve as children mature.

 

In his office at the NIH, Giedd points to an image of a brain on his computer screen that illustrates brain development from childhood to adulthood. As he sets the time lapse in motion, the brain turns blue rapidly in some areas and more slowly in others. One area that's slow to turn blue ? which represents development over time ? is the right side just over the temple. It's the spot on the head where a parent might tap a frustrated finger while asking his teen, "What were you thinking?"

 

This underdeveloped area is called the dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex. The underdeveloped blue on Giedd's screen is where thoughts of long-term consequences spring to consciousness. And in teen after teen, the research team found, it's not fully mature.

 

"This is the top rung," Giedd says. "This is the part of the brain that, in a sense, associates everything. All of our hopes and dreams for the future. All of our memories of the past. Our values. Everything going on in our environment. Everything to make a decision."

 

When a smart, talented and very mature teen does something a parent might call "stupid," Giedd says, it's this underdeveloped part of the brain that has most likely failed.

 

"That's the part of the brain that helps look farther ahead," he says. "In a sense, increasing the time between impulse and decisions. It seems not to get as good as it's going to get until age 25."

 

This slow process plays a kind of dirty trick on teens, whose hormones are churning. As their bodies turn more adultlike, the hormones encourage more risk-taking and thrill-seeking. That might be nature's way of helping them leave the nest. But as the hormones fire up the part of the brain that responds to pleasure, known as the limbic system, emotions run high. Those emotions make it hard to quickly form wise judgments.

[Landon D. Parks]

We are not getting married in Indiana... We are getting married in New York... More than likly in August or September. We have to wait till she's 16, even there.

 

And just in case your wondering, our parents are all cool with it. We are not running off to get married...

 

PS) Indiana has to honor the the marriage license, no matter how old we where when married. This also means under indiana law, we will both be Emancipated, and Indiana must Honor this too...

 

Don't you just love america? All kinds of legak loop holes..

 

PS) What is that you posted (that bunch of jibberish you quoted)? What ever it is it looks boring, so I think I'll skip reading it if you dont mind... I have a short attention span you know... Don't you just love people who thinkt they know everything, they can write long and boring articals like the one you posted and think that everyone else will think there cool... I dont.

 

You know, we should not aruge, we may be working together one day! :unsure:

Edited June 9, 2005 by Landon D. Parks

[Brian Wells]

we may be working together one day!

Hope so. ;)

[Boone Hudgins]

It seems really, really rash to blame a cinematographer for the inflated budgets on some films. How many 60 million dollar movies are there with a star earning 20 million? 100+ crew members making, collectively, slightly more than one actor. It's arguable that there is plenty of waste in the film industry, but you're probably not going to find it below the line.

 

Traditionally, freelance workers tend to get paid more for doing a given job. It evens things out because they're not consistently employed. Besides, anybody who works a 10 or more hour day without sitting down is entitled to some cash. That's painful work.

[Michael Most]

And colourists... let's not even go there, when all you have to do is turn up and do it and someone else maintains the equipment for you, how can you fail to cash in!

 

You mean like a director of photography??

 

Let's face it Phil, you've posted (repeatedly) here about your low opinion of colorists. Give it a rest.

[Matt Pacini]

A vain attempt to rein in this thread from its silliness...

 

First of all, I'd like to thank David for having the guts to post what he makes here.

Very informative, and I'd say not many would be willing to do that.

 

Anyway, as a confirmed capitalist, the fact is, whatever someone thinks you're worth, is what you're worth.

If someone thinks the job is worth $100 a month, then that's what it's worth.

If someone thinks the job is worth $1 million a month, then that's what it's worth, because they've determined that if they pay you X, then you're generating for them X+.

 

If anyone is going to rant about who doesn't deserve what they're paid, let's talk about Dicapprio making $20 million for "The Beach", and other travesties like that.

I'm frankly surprised that the pay scale for actors like this isn't at least partly based on profits. Like, you get $5 million guaranteed, then if it grosses over $100mil, you get another 10, or whatever.

 

Anyway, I've seen David's work, and I'm sure as he continues to gain recognition for his considerable skill & talent, (and therefore increase profits of his employers!)

he will continue to make more and more money, all quite well-deserved.

 

MP

[Michael Most]

because in a few months I'll be Emancipated, because I'm getting married. I doubt this law will apply to me then anyway since I'll legally be 18.... And not under the control of my parents anymore.

 

Well, there's certainly a lot of maturity evident in that statement.

 

As you attempt to move into the industry you seem to think you're going to dazzle, you might come to realize that education isn't about learning a craft. That's what trade school is for. Higher education is about life. After the first few meetings with real actors and producers in which many literary and artistic references are brought up that you know nothing about, you might begin to realize that being a visionary director has very little to do with knowing how to place the camera in an interesting position and everything to do with looking at life in a probing, compelling way. In order to do this, you actually have to live for a certain amount of time, certainly more than 17 years. You have to travel. You have to meet people you would never meet in a "normal" situation. You have to read. You have to study classical art and music. And you have to observe people reacting to each other in social environments to learn more about human tendencies and the human condition. This is what higher education is really about. It provides a "safe" atmosphere in which to pursue all of these things, a time in life when you are old enough to be open to them, but not yet responsible for the things you will eventually have to deal with. While it is true that none of this is "required" for entry into the film industry, those at the top of that industry are not kids who came to town and suddenly took it over. They are, for the most part, highly educated and intelligent people who are as familiar with Roy Lichtenstein as they are with Monet, and who have read everything from Chuck Palahniuk to Charles Dickens. They musical taste runs the gamut from the Black Eyed Peas to Count Basie to George Gershwin and everything else in between. They have seen and studied cinema from Sergei Eisenstein to Steven Spielberg, and are intimately familiar with multiple genres and multiple styles. They understand and appreciate the masters of all of these mediums and draw on them for inspiration and guidance.

 

I fully expect that you will dismiss all of this as complete bullshit. So be it. Someday you will grow up (or not) and you will understand (or not). Until then, please try to realize that there's more to being a mature adult artist than rebellion. You won't, but you should try.

[David Mullen ASC]

The thing about the $700/day rate for DP's is that a feature paying those rates will probably work you no more than 50 days or so, so that's $35,000 or more. If you're lucky, you shoot two features a year like that, so that's maybe $70,000 a year, maybe more.

 

Anyway, here in Los Angeles, it works out to be a middle class income. Some years you may get really lucky and work many days, but some other years, you may hardly work at all. So it could be $150,000 one year and $40,000 the next, and so on... working at those rates that Landon finds so objectionable! And many times you probably would work for less than that (more like what Landon thinks we should be making I guess.)

 

Too many people who are beginning filmmakers fail to understand that for some crew people it's not a hobby we dabble in on our weekends, it's a career.

 

Too often on indie films on a flat rate, crew people end up making minimum wage once the hours per day get long. You pay someone to work as an electrician or camera assistant for $100/day flat and then the day goes 18 hours, that's $5.55/hr... No one is going to have a decent middle-class lifestyle with a family at those wages, especially since one doesn't work 52 weeks a year either.

[Landon D. Parks]

Mike, I understand your concern... And, rahter you beleive it or not, I do pay a ttention to it... Thats why I'm here, to learn from people like yourself.

 

I guess we just dont see eye to eye on the subject. You are more than likly right that I just dont understand it yet, and It may come to me one day in the future... I just don't think it will take that long though. But I do take your advice to heart, because I know that ur older than me and have been doing this a lot longer than me....

[Riku Naskali]

So the education is important in the states? Here in Finland nobody cares what diploma you are carrying, it all comes down to who you know and how much experience you have. Of course it helps if you have some skills, too ;)

 

The "union wage" for a DP here in Finland is about $200 (8-hour days). And that's considered a good salary here. I don't even want to know how much it costs to live in LA...

 

(There is really no effective union, and jobs pay what they pay.)

 

However, my knowledge is second-handed because I don't get paid. Maybe someday.

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

I don't think Daniel is aware of just how few days of the year one works.  I've worked 10 weeks total so far this year, and it's mid-June, so that's like 10 weeks out of 26 or so (the upside is that I have time to answer so many questions here...)

Wah? So you can afford to work 10 weeks so far of this year? This DP business is looking better by the second!

 

First, have you heard of a thing called TAXES? Ever heard of those?

 

Let's say you make $2000.00 per week as a DOP on a film, the tax man will want about 40% of that in the USA when you add in the self employment tax. Plus you'll need to buy health insurance working in the USA, they don't have NHS you know.

Yeh, but even people with jobs paying half that still get taxes.

 

So you think you'll be living the high life in America eh, sitting in your mansion that you bought for $45,000.00?

Well, put it this way, when my Dad bought the house (and I'm not really suppose to go round saying all this but David's being open so..) he bought it for round about £100 grand. House prices in Britain have risen so much that the value of the house is now about £300 grand. Some years back we were looking into moving to America, we were looking at the houses we'd get for that kind of money, and.. wow.... this is why I say they're dirt cheap out in America. We would seriously get a mansion.

 

AND, the rate David Mullen quoted is higher than what my Dad earns, so as a DP on that kind of a rate, I'd of thought you would get some kind of a mansion.

 

But as David said, you're not always able to work very many days of the year, so you won't earn a huge amount, but you get plenty of time off. (To spend around here!)

 

Don't take this offensively David or anything, but, being able to afford to only work 10 weeks so far of this year is considered a luxury to most people. My Dad might get 3 or 4 days off a month, that's how often he has to work to pay all the bills e.t.c. And those are full days, getting up at 5 in the morning and finishing at 10 at night.

 

I know what you're saying guys and I am taking it in, but as a fact I know, depending on how much you work a year, that kind of a wage is massive compared to most peoples, and again, depending on how often you work, enough to buy a mansion with some pretty nice cars.

Edited June 10, 2005 by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

I was thinking about applying for agency work, then I can get work when I want/need it. And film for the rest of the year. That way if I don't get much filming work I can still get agency work, which pays well apparently anyway.

[Stephen Williams]

David or anything, but, being able to afford to only work 10 weeks so far of this year is considered a luxury to most people.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Daniel,

 

I don't think its by choice David has only worked for 10 weeks. He has just had one film! One less job and he would have had NO WORK! Remember there are many DP's chasing every pop video, commercial and film.

 

Stephen Williams DP

 

www.stephenw.com