Topic: Taping for Profit Question

[cgrooves]

There is a possibility that I may have the opportunity to tape bands playing wedding gigs.  The gigs would be set up from the bands' promoter, and would be an 'add-on' option available to the wedding party as a chance to have their wedding gig preserved on disc.  I'm sure the promoter would like to make a little money for offering this service as well, so.......

What would be considered fair compensation from the promoter for me to perform this service on their behalf?  What type of copyright law would be involved in something like this?  (I would assume that both the wedding party and the performing act would have the copyrights)

Also, what would be fair compensation from a videographer to provide them with a good matrix or audience recording for them to mix with their video?

Thanks for the help.

[mmmatt]

There is a possibility that I may have the opportunity to tape bands playing wedding gigs.  The gigs would be set up from the bands' promoter, and would be an 'add-on' option available to the wedding party as a chance to have their wedding gig preserved on disc.  I'm sure the promoter would like to make a little money for offering this service as well, so.......

What would be considered fair compensation from the promoter for me to perform this service on their behalf?  What type of copyright law would be involved in something like this?  (I would assume that both the wedding party and the performing act would have the copyrights)

Also, what would be fair compensation from a videographer to provide them with a good matrix or audience recording for them to mix with their video?

Thanks for the help.

copyright when related to sound recordings is a rather complicated thing.  Technically the rights to the recording would be shared by the performing artist and the recordist.  The recordist however, if payed a flat fee by the promoter would actually be selling his rights to copyright of the recording in most cases (depending on the actual contract).
     That all being said, the mechanical lisensing of the songs performed by the artst that are not the original works of the artist, are going to be charged a fee based on the number of copies sold, so in your case, there is just 1 or 2 copies being sold and I would not personally bother with the mechanical licensing fees. (I don't think Harry Fox agency would care to deal with it either)
     If you do this, I would put all the busniness end of this on the promoter.  Produce a simple contract that says he is hiring you for your recording services and he is responsible for all permissions and copyright negotiation etc.  Also make sure that you are going to be paid for showing up... I personally wouldn't go for the whole "if they like it they will buy it and you will get paid" thing...
     As for payment... what is it worth for you to show up and tape a wedding band?  Band = shit,  but drunken brides maids = !!!  Is it worth it for you to show up and tape for $50 or $100?  I would set my price like that.  Wedding receptions are long and I'm sure you would have to be there for everything so the $ per hr thing isn't going to be big $$$.  A good photagrapher is thousands for a wedding gig.   I would probably patch out to the vid guy for a few bucks extra or for a post mix do it all for the same fee you would charge for audio only.  The service would be a nice add-on also.  Quality ambient recordings in a church are very nice and everyone has their church wedding video taped these days!

Matt

[slayerrocker]

$50 per hour - at 6-8 hours on site and 4 hours post processing that is reasonable and cheap relative to video and photo.

[mmmatt]

$50 per hour - at 6-8 hours on site and 4 hours post processing that is reasonable and cheap relative to video and photo.

very reasonable for the work involved, but I doubt you will get many takers.  Maybe with highend clientel, but for the masses $5-600 would not be in the budget.

Matt

[TNJazz]

Agreed.  Audio is almost irrelevant for wedding situations.  Video might command those prices, but not audio.  I'd set a flat fee and make sure open bar (if there is one) is included.     Figure on maybe $200 or so per gig, I would say based on past experience.

[guitard]

Agreed.  Audio is almost irrelevant for wedding situations.  Video might command those prices, but not audio.  I'd set a flat fee and make sure open bar (if there is one) is included.     Figure on maybe $200 or so per gig, I would say based on past experience.

I think people would be willing to fork over the cash if they knew how much nicer the video would be if it had good audio.  But they don't know that - and are probably inclined to think, "We got the video, it's already got audio, what do we need this other audio source for?"

The other problem is that the videographer might not like doing this because: 1) it'll probably have to come from his fee & 2) now he has to synch the audio with the video, and he already has a shitload of work to do as it is.