Would you giveaway your video footage for a project that would air on TV?

[PhreeZone 15]

This is prompted after a discussion in Bonfire about a project like covering the Nationals then making it into a product that could air on ESPN or another channel.

Currently I know that the Nationals videographers have to turn their footage over and its usually put into a Nationals Video/DVD that can be purchased to see excatly how every team did on all the jumps. Lots of teams use it as a learnign experiene to see if another team is doing something faster and if they can learn any new tricks.

What I'm talking about is if a Producer came along and took all the raw footage and made it into a half hour/ hour show showcasing nationals that would air on National television... would you agree to let your footage be used in this fashion? Would you change your stance if it was a requirement to compete at Nationals?

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[bob.dino 0]

A percentage of the fee received, based on the amount of time your footage is on screen seems fair.

That way there's no upfront cost to the producers, but advantage isn't taken of the video folk.

[bigway 4]

i have done a bit of marketing my dz in a a much smaller country by giving footage to tv shows(fun clips and tandems) and news shows(like santa jumping) for free. It was other jumpers footage and they were all up for it as long as there were contracts signed that they can not sell it to other shows or other countries, they were making sure no one like real tv got it or anything. So from this what i think is that...it depends on where you want to take your future with filming skydiving, if you already have television shows on your resume then make them pay for it, if not give it to them for free with contracts signed so you can mark this down on your resume, otherwise they may just go to the next guy in line who will give it for free so he can get the exposure.
If you were to give it for free you would want to put a mark on it(like a photo water mark), you would make sure in writing that they can not use it for any other purpose than what you have agreed on and most definetly do not let them sell it, even if you were to get a percentage. If they were to sell it and you get a cut, well it might be good at the time but then the next people will sell it and so on, then it will just end up on Real TV or a show taking the piss out of our sport where you can do nothing about it.

This is my advice if you were looking to get involved with tv adverts etc...

.Karnage Krew Gear Store
.

[pope 0]

not for free...

[jdhill 0]

If anyone (DZ, USPA, etc) is getting paid for the peice, then those who contribute footage should, at the very least, get a percentage. I would suggest getting a written agreement regarding copyright and any monitary matters (if you allow it, only give a limited license unless they are paying for more than that)... If they were to make it a requirement for nationals, there should be some sort of compensation (free jumps or $$$)... I already have a rub with the selling of footage, with no consideration for the videographer, required to be given at nationals.

The product would be marketing for someone, and marketing is not free.

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[WrongWay 0]

For me it would depend on the footage.

If it's just happy smiley freefly footage....something that would shine a positive light on the sport.....sure, I'd either give it or sell it, whatever.

If it's "You Gotta See This" footage of one of my buddies hooking in and breaking himself.....no way I'd let them get ahold of it. Period.

Wrong Way
D #27371 Mal Manera Rodriguez Cajun Chicken Ø Hellfish #451
The wiser wolf prevails.

[PhreeZone 15]

Lets say you are in the Nationals and competing in freefly. They want every round and you have no say so at all in how anything gets used. Remember at Nationals most camera flyers have 2 camera's and some are jumping stills for their sponsors. The only credit you'll get is a mention in the credits.

Would you still give it away if you knew the person/company that got it was going to be making say...$15,000 on the project?

I used to have the attitude of I don't care and if anyone wants the video they can use it as long as my name gets on TV... but I changed my feelings after talking to Quade and a few others. I'd want something.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[WrongWay 0]

Hmmm.....that's a good question.

Yes, I'd want something if it was used for a commercial purpose.

Still, when it comes specifically to Nationals (or other official competitions), I'd be happy if they waived or greatly reduced the registration fee.

My opinion might change if I actually competed at Nationals. What do ya say Phree?

Wrong Way
D #27371 Mal Manera Rodriguez Cajun Chicken Ø Hellfish #451
The wiser wolf prevails.

[LouDiamond 1]

It in the details, Don't know if the camera flyers were required to sign any paperwork saying that their footage could be used without their being compensated or if they would get credit or if it became property of the event. That is something one may want to think about next time they have to sign something in order to film at an event.

In general, not tied to a specific event like nationals, if you filmed it and they want to use it then you should be compensated for it. Especially if they are going to use it in an ad campaign where they sell a product or service. I was contacted a while back from a corp in japan about some of my footage that they wanted to use. Come to find out ,it would be used to sell a product so I made sure I got my Movie check and still retained the rights to the original footage. It's in the details, read the paperwork or hire a lawyer. Quade had a very useful thread similar to this ref still pictures that is within the same vein.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[quade 3]

As a camera flyer, you hand your footage over to the USPA as part of the price of admission to "The Nationals".

If somebody wants to make a Nationals tape and sell that so that people can learn from the pros, I have no real issue with that. It's not like they're really going to make any money off of it.

If somebody wants to repackage the Nationals for ESPN broadcast, then they're going to have a lawsuit on their hands if they don't pay. Period.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[riggerrob 558]

Last year I gave some handi-cam footage to the Shaw Cable TV Network reporter who jumped with me. A second - outside - videographer also gave them free footage and the DZO gave the guy a free tandem jump.
Several students mentioned that they saw my handsome face on Shaw Cable TV, but since the cable company never had the courtesy to give us a copy of their final product, that is the last time I part with any footage for free.

[JayhawkJumper 0]

I seriously doubt that any network like ESPN would even think about broadcasting the nationals without getting all the rights in advance. For a large network like that, its much less risky and makes more sense to pay the videographers a few thousand dollars for their footage instead of risk a lawsuit for hundreds of thousands later.

[Douva 0]

The Bonfire thread is not about USPA taking footage from previous Nationals and using it for broadcast. It's also not about USPA or anyone else making money off the labor of team camera flyers. This would be a more accurate way to phrase the question: If the USPA reached an agreement to provide ESPN 2 or some other secondary sports television network with a thirty to sixty minute broadcast of the U.S. Nationals, either for free or at cost (If anything at all, USPA is only reimbursed for the cost of hiring color commentators, the ground video crew, editors, etc.), would you be willing to agree as part of the Nationals registration agreement to release your footage for this purpose, the same way you now agree to release your footage for the Nationals DVD? Considering Nationals footage is not the type of thing you are likely to sell in another venue and exposure on ESPN 2 could look really good on a videographer's résumé, I think this would be a reasonable arrangement.

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[LouDiamond 1]

Interesting angle but I couldn't tell you the name of even 1 of the regular camera men for ESPN right now so I doubt it would get you that much more coverage for your name or your work.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Douva 0]

Quote

Interesting angle but I couldn't tell you the name of even 1 of the regular camera men for ESPN right now so I doubt it would get you that much more coverage for your name or your work.

Having your work aired on ESPN wouldn't make you famous, but if you are trying to market yourself as a professional cameraman, wouldn't it be nice to tell a prospective client or team or whatever, "If you saw ESPN's coverage of last year's National Skydiving Championships, you saw some of my work."

And you also have to remember that you're not looking to hire a sports videographer when you watch ESPN. A commercial producer or somebody like that could always see the footage and think, "That's exactly what we need in our next car commercial--Who shot this?"

I'm not claiming this is the path to fame and fortune, but the upside seems to far outweigh any downside. You've worked hard to be able to turn out that quality footage. Your team has worked hard to be able to turn out a quality performance. Why not let the world see what you can do?

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[quade 3]

Quote

A commercial producer or somebody like that could always see the footage and think, "That's exactly what we need in our next car commercial--Who shot this?"

. . . and then they'd hire Joe Jennings. Seriously. He has far more movie and commercial experience as well as a 35mm movie camera helmet that most of us don't.

For the videographers involved, there is simply -no- upside to this idea.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[freefalle 0]

As usual, well put Quade.

[Douva 0]

Quote

Quote

A commercial producer or somebody like that could always see the footage and think, "That's exactly what we need in our next car commercial--Who shot this?"

. . . and then they'd hire Joe Jennings. Seriously. He has far more movie and commercial experience as well as a 35mm movie camera helmet that most of us don't.

For the videographers involved, there is simply -no- upside to this idea.

Like I said, it's not a "big break" that's going to land you fame and fortune, but what is the downside? Why not allow your footage to be used to promote the sport? Hell, if nothing else, I think being able to have your friends and family all over the country tune in and see your work on national TV would be an upside.

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Quote

A commercial producer or somebody like that could always see the footage and think, "That's exactly what we need in our next car commercial--Who shot this?"

. . . and then they'd hire Joe Jennings. Seriously. He has far more movie and commercial experience as well as a 35mm movie camera helmet that most of us don't.

For the videographers involved, there is simply -no- upside to this idea.

BINGO! Give the man a cigar. If you want to get the exposure of a commercial producer you need to follow the same concept people like Jennings,Gasson,Kent amongst others have already taken. Until 35mm cameras are common on every skydivers helmet, your not going to find too many producers looking at the average Joes DV footage.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Faber 0]

Quote

Why not allow your footage to be used to promote the sport?

the sport is all about mony.. why give away whats its all about??

few jumpers whith really high experience keeps jumping whith out atleast a small profit(free jumps free pack jobs etc etc).Its skydive wake up.. the days were people did it for fun and free is gone,not asking mony for your work is not right anymore...

sad but true..

even if it wasnt,wouldnt you get mad if people were making mony at your videos whith out paying you some credits? i would..

Stay safe
Stefan Faber

[Douva 0]

Quote

the sport is all about mony....even if it wasnt,wouldnt you get mad if people were making mony at your videos whith out paying you some credits? i would..

But I've already explained that they're not making money, you are getting credit, and it's not the type of footage you're likely to sell anywhere else, so what's the problem with donating it to the betterment of the sport?

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[turtlespeed 212]

Not free, but not gouging either.

What does a free lance photographer make / pic used?

What would they pay for footage from someone that just happened to catch something interesting at some game somewhere?

I would be more interested in the credit rather than the money - bigger name on screen and longer the less I would charge. Yes - it's an ego thing. I'll admit that much.

If they would ask me to do that for free - I would ask ESPN to air it for free.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lewmonst 0]

Quote

they're not making money

They all say that. But if it's on TV, someone is making money off it.

peace
lew

http://www.exitshot.com

[AndyMan 7]

Is it not the case that if you ever hope to get any "pro" TV or Hollywood work, you need to be a member of one of the big Unions, like the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences ?

Is it not also the case that those same unions prohibits you from working for free?

I don't think that actually does prohibit anyone from doing anything for free, but I do think it essentially prohibits you from putting free work on your resume.

The "credit" you get from doing "free" work is worthless if the work you're trying to get is in TV or Film

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[Douva 0]

Quote

Is it not the case that if you ever hope to get any "pro" TV or Hollywood work, you need to be a member of one of the big Unions, like the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences ?

Is it not also the case that those same unions prohibits you from working for free?

I don't think that actually does prohibit anyone from doing anything for free, but I do think it essentially prohibits you from putting free work on your resume.

The "credit" you get from doing "free" work is worthless if the work you're trying to get is in TV or Film

_Am

The AMPAS is not a union or a regulatory body; it's an honorary organization of top filmmakers. Membership is by invitation only.

The unions that do exist, such as the IATSE, do not regulate the type of work we are discussing.

In order to gain membership in any film or television union, you must have a certain number of credits in your field. A good percentage of these credits are usually gained by working for free.

I don't know of any union that prohibits members from using any credits earned prior to joining.

A quick glance at both Joe Jennings's and Norman Kent's online résumés shows no union affiliation other than SAG (Screen Actors Guild).

I guess the negative tone in these two threads is finally wearing on me because I feel the need to close by suggesting that in the future you refrain from making comments or giving advice on subjects you obviously know very little about.

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.