Jump to content

$1K vs $10K vs $100K videos


Recommended Posts

@IronFilm im sorry, i dont mean to be negative, i was painting all night thinking about art lol

i guess i feel like the money was spent in these videos on all the nuts and bolts aspects of the production in each case, things like THE CAMERA, the way it moves, lighting, etc., which makes perfect sense, dont get me wrong~!

but conceptually, the three are quite similar, and i guesss i dont think that the increased budget made the clips better

so i was thinking about that, from a nonconceptual standpoint, looking at the production in technical terms, why is that?

and i think its because: ive become so desensitized to watching "amateurish" smartphone videos, presented as being professional, that it has become the new normal

edit: yes ofc i see the difference in production quality, im saying its not reflected in overall quality. all three ads suck. if i paid $1000 for the first ad id honestly be like WTF... is this a joke? thats why i said that!

its AWFUL. *NOTHING* is good about it... nothing!!!! it stinks on paper: its poorly written, poorly conceived, unoriginal and boring. the acting is awful, that guy sucks, hes not funny... i mean what the hell ? there are THOUSANDS of 6 SECOND VINE VIDEOS that are borderline amazing with a budget of $0

sorry to be such a hard ass (i admit it lol), and i understand the point about production being scaled in various ways due to budget!

a great exercise, i think, would be to commission something like this, with the SAME SCRIPT, something that presents some production challenges on the page, then produce the films on wildly different budgets. the low budget film would be forced to be super creative in that regard, while the high budget film would have awesome tools which make the impossible possible, or at least way easier

im just thinking out loud! hands up dont shoot! ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
7 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I was kinda disappointed how little they put into sound at each level. Even the $100K was just one guy doing it ENG

Or the improvements in Jingle Quality and Sound Design. The low budget Ad has pretty decent (field) sound (recording quality) for the price. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I think using the example of the iPhone to make that Ad is pushing it a bit as they say. But now with the PK4 out we are talking a heck of a lot narrower gap between it and a Arri Alexa. That camera has now, for a lot of uses rigged out right, is a total game changer. And when BRaw comes to it it is even going to be more useful. So I don't think there is going to be as many 100K Ads made as before. Maybe 20K gets it done. Who knows. But it is going to get harder and harder in a few years for a person to justify using a Arri unless you are doing a Serious Project. Even the DR gap is not huge either. 1 1/2, 2 stops. Now sure the LF one is more, but we are only talking crazy high end stuff yet using it. Amazing how fast the gap has narrowed in the last few years.

I think if they came out with a PK4 in a true Cine body say EVA1, FS5 sized they would really sell the crap out of them at  even 2500 bucks a pop. Personally I think the body shape is just too goofy the way it is. Right now there is no place to even put your right thumb without pushing on the Aperture, Focus buttons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, austinchimp said:

I only watched it once but wasn't there a behind the scenes clip where the camera panned away from the guy filming on an iPhone to show some of the other guys sitting and watching and reacting?

It's not very clear but it suggests they were contributing to it in some sense. To get multiple senior creatives to have any input in a '$1000 video' strikes me as a little unlikely but who knows.

Yes, but you shouldn't include their time in the costs of the video. 

They were just there because their office was being used at the location to film the video itself. 

The $1K video was kinda more or less done entirely just by that one guy. (but with a bit of arm twisting of whoever else he could grab, just a few low level non-specialists)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The $1K-$10K-$100K theme is a marketing ploy.  The $1,000 spot looks amateurish, while the $10,000 spot looks a lot better, yet the $100,000 spot does not add a lot more to the finished product.

Offer three different trim levels on automobiles, and most people will buy the middle level.  I'm not sure what type of client would spend $100,000 on a commercial, but I'm sure that this company is marketing to clients who are willing, and able to buy a commercial for $10,000. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2018 at 10:21 PM, noone said:

I watched them and nothing changes!

Why comment on my comment?

Nice bait!! Bravo.

9 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I'd not be happy with that blown out window on that last shot if I paid 100,000

I thought the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2018 at 2:09 PM, KC Kelly said:

 The $1,000 spot looks amateurish, while the $10,000 spot looks a lot better, yet the $100,000 spot does not add a lot more to the finished product.

I'm amazed how people can't tell that the $100K spot is noticeably better. 
Sure, we get the law of diminishing returns kicking in hard. But that is true for everything in life 
Yet still, the $100K video is clearly a better video.


On 11/5/2018 at 2:57 PM, thebrothersthre3 said:

I'd not be happy with that blown out window on that last shot if I paid 100,000

For that you need to spend ten times more :-P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, KC Kelly said:

Will the average person notice the difference?

I believe they do subconsciously. 
They might not be able to articulate it though, as they don't have our trained filmmaker's eye.


54 minutes ago, KC Kelly said:

Does the $100K spot market the product 10X better? 

a) diminishing returns apply
b) how do you define "10X better"??

Let's make up some random simple numbers as a basic example:

A company sells $40,000,000 of a product each year with a 25% profit margin on that. 
They predict if they spend $10K on an advert and $400K on the advertising spend for that advert that then they'll see a 10% lift in sales in the coming year.
Should they do this? Of course they should! It will lead to millions of dollars in extra profit. 

Now what if they predict they'll get a 20% lift in sales with the $100K advert? (with the same $400K advertising spend. Although... often this budget would be larger too, to go along with the pricier video budget itself. But hey, I'm not pulling this example from any real life figures, and I'm just keeping the figures simple)

You might say "But David, they're only seeing a 2X improvement for a 10X increase in production cost!!" 

However I'd suggest you stop and re-think this, you don't need have the video be anywhere near "10X better" for it to be worthwhile to spend 10X more on the video shoot. 

Rather instead if the client believes these figures (of a 2X improvement on their sales volume increase vs the $10K video) then this is an obvious no brainier decision they should make to spend $100K on the video. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
  • Create New...