A Forceful Perspective on Working for Free

[remmet]

It looks like composers aren't the only ones being asked to work for free. I once collaborated with Harlan Ellison back in the '80's. Here's his take on the subject:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE



Richard
www.richardemmet.com

[PaulR]

I think his real beef is not really about working for free. Not in the way he usually talks.

His real issue is with crass, stupid dumb a$$ people with low IQ's that he regards as infecting the planet as a whole. And of course, that's quite understandable.

[Kostas]

I think his real beef is not really about working for free. Not in the way he usually talks.

His real issue is with crass, stupid dumb a$$ people with low IQ's that he regards as infecting the planet as a whole. And of course, that's quite understandable.

It's not about low IQ, but how many people offer their IQ for free( or a bad use of it

-Kostas

[nickysnd]

"You're undercut by all the amateurs."

Finally someone said it. That is precisely THE problem.

Loved it! Thanks for posting it!

[WoodIsGood]

Well put. That was refreshing to watch. Thanks!

[awpmusic]

It looks like composers aren't the only ones being asked to work for free. I once collaborated with Harlan Ellison back in the '80's. Here's his take on the subject:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE



Richard
www.richardemmet.com

He's absolutely correct - and it's getting harder and harder to earn a crust. The entire theatre and film industry seems to be expected to do work for free - actors, technicians, designers and composers all affected by this. Doesn't happen in any other industry I know of and it's making me very tired.

[Andrew Sigler]

This was shown at SXSW this year. It got a great response!

-Andy

[Jim Curits]

Absolutely fantastic, what a great link to send to people after freebies that think our studios run on fresh air!:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Counterpoint]

Nice video, he's absolutely right.

I thought a few times that his head was going to explode though. :)

It does get to be a problem though... I've lost some potential contracts because of being undercut by someone who was willing to do it for free.

I think that in some situations (like for a cause you believe in) it is OK to work for free, but usually this is because one's service is volunteered and not "sought after" by someone who has a salary.

Man though.. he gets paid to take a piss? How do I get that job? :)

- Matt

[tmhuud]

Harlan is great! I love that guy. (one of my favorite writers as well) Irascible as hell. I knew a girl who was his personal assistant for 2 years. The stories she has! Great stuff.

This is a real problem in our circles and there’s no simple solution. Several times composers have tried to organize to help put standard fees to their work but nothings ever really stuck.

Cheers,

[t_l]

Nice. Makes me want to burn a few peoples businesses now. lol. Not getting a copy of your work feels like shit.

[nikolas]

Fees do depend on who you talk to and who the client is really. Can't compare indie with commercial, and freeware with anything.

but guidelines, do always help!

I do think that the better you get however the less free gigs you are asked to do. I doubt anyone calls Zimmer and goes "Hello Hans. I was wondering if you could composer 90 minutes of music for free. You know, because I'm a student but have this vision...". :D I doubt "smaller" pros get much asking for free stuff and it always depends on your profile towards the outside world.

[nickysnd]

This is a real problem in our circles and there’s no simple solution. Several times composers have tried to organize to help put standard fees to their work but nothings ever really stuck.
As a AFM member I never worked for free as a musician/copyist/orchestrator. And the rates are quite good. AFM is a great union and it really works, while dealing with the same producers that expect free work from composers. They don't expect a cello player to play for free for their films, and they are "forced" to pay her at AFM rates. I wonder why the AFM model is not set up to work with composers? Hourly minimal standards are easy to set up (or minimal rates per seconds of music, or similar). What prevents a composers' union to work as AFM works? Are composers more greedy, or more stupid than players/orchestrators? Is greed the problem? Is it stupidity? What is it?

[Counterpoint]

As a AFM member I never worked for free as a musician/copyist/orchestrator. And the rates are quite good. AFM is a great union and it really works, while dealing with the same producers that expect free work from composers. They don't expect a cello player to play for free for their films, and they are "forced" to pay her at AFM rates. I wonder why the AFM model is not set up to work with composers? Hourly minimal standards are easy to set up (or minimal rates per seconds of music, or similar). What prevents a composers' union to work as AFM works? Are composers more greedy, or more stupid than players/orchestrators? Is greed the problem? Is it stupidity? What is it?

I think (and this is just an opinion) that it is because there is too much variation in the amount composers get paid.. anywhere from $0 to $6,000,000 or more. The guys at the top would probably get a little bit upset if this became standardized to $1000 per minute of music. That would be a pretty big pay cut for them.

We can't really compare the composer to the musicians either... the musicians have a very well defined job. They provide a performance, which means booking a recording session and the recording space. Since this all works out into hourly rates, it's pretty easy to standardize.

How long does it take a composer to create a film score and how much effort does it take? This is not such an easy thing to standardize.

- Matt

[nickysnd]

I think (and this is just an opinion) that it is because there is too much variation in the amount composers get paid.. anywhere from $0 to $6,000,000 or more. The guys at the top would probably get a little bit upset if this became standardized to $1000 per minute of music. That would be a pretty big pay cut for them.
I said: minimal rates. Like a minimal fee of (say) $100 per second of music for big budget films. Less for medium budget. And so on, down to (say) $20 per second of music for indie movies. It can go anywhere above that figure, like $500 per second for John Williams.

So, your answer seems to be: greed, that's the problem. But isn't it also stupidity? Composers could form an union, set the minimal payment standards, and who doesn't comply and works for less gets sued. Working under the table will surely go on to some extent, but producers will probably feel uncomfortable to do that. They will have to provide documents on how much they spent for the original music. Not so nice to practice slavery.

We can't really compare the composer to the musicians either... the musicians have a very well defined job. They provide a performance, which means booking a recording session and the recording space. Since this all works out into hourly rates, it's pretty easy to standardize.
And so is to standardize the composer's payment, as seen above: minimal rates per second of music.

How long does it take a composer to create a film score and how much effort does it take? This is not such an easy thing to standardize.
You don't standardize that, you standardize minimal fees per second of music. You are not paid for the hours spent on scoring, or for the effort. You are paid on a seconds of music basis. If you do a 60 minutes score effortlessly in a couple of days, the better for you -- you can go play golf in your spare time. :) If you work like a dog for a month during which you barely sleep, that's your problem, makes no difference to the fee you get.

Minimal rates per seconds of music seems to me a pretty fair standard, also easy to implement.

Thoughts?

[remmet]

Minimal rates per seconds of music seems to me a pretty fair standard, also easy to implement.

Thoughts?

One of the problems with such an approach concerns the fact that not every composer is dealing in the world of film scoring. There are dozens of other types of projects besides feature films that need music. And within these many categories, the production budgets, media distribution and exposure, and associated prestige - or lack thereof - vary wildly. How do you create a standardized pay rate amid all these variables? I think it boils down to being willing and able to negotiate the best deal you can, and like Harlan, tell them to go to hell if they expect you to work for free.

The other problem is that there are too many people who WILL work for free. After all, they've got the latest version of Garageband and the vast musical perspective afforded by a brief lifetime of exposure to contemporary pop media, so they MUST be genuine composers! And sadly, someone will always hire them!

Oh well. I'll go listen to some Bach and Mahler now. :(

Richard

[nickysnd]

One of the problems with such an approach concerns the fact that not every composer is dealing in the world of film scoring. There are dozens of other types of projects besides feature films that need music. And within these many categories, the production budgets, media distribution and exposure, and associated prestige - or lack thereof - vary wildly. How do you create a standardized pay rate amid all these variables?
That's exactly what AFM does: providing rates for each and every variable. It's easy to do, it just takes a little time. How many variable can be for composers? A few dozens, under one hundred variables. Such a list can be done in hours. So the problem lies not with the variables.

I think the problem is the lack of will, based on greed, envy, and on the composers' habit to undercut each other, instead of sticking together. I call that stupidity. We are brothers, we are not enemies to each other. The slaves, the amateurs -- they are our deadly enemies, they are killing the market. And they can be outlawed.

I think it boils down to being willing and able to negotiate the best deal you can, and like Harlan, tell them to go to hell if they expect you to work for free.
That's how it is now, and it doesn't work -- that doesn't press producers to dismiss slavery offers. AFM really does prevent them from hiring slaves (not completely, but it's working, I vouch fort that). So composers can follow that model.

The other problem is that there are too many people who WILL work for free. After all, they've got the latest version of Garageband and the vast musical perspective afforded by a brief lifetime of exposure to contemporary pop media, so they MUST be genuine composers! And sadly, someone will always hire them!
I have addressed that when saying that there will surely be a black market, but many producers will feel uncomfortable paying under the table. Also, they will know that the union might sue them for not paying the legal minimal fees, and they will have to provide documents about how much did they pay for scoring.

This whole thing can be and ought to be regulated. Minimal fees per second of music for each type of project. It's easy to do. As they say, where there's a will there's a way.

[rainmain]

Great video. I think it can be hard for composers to initially realize their worth when a lot of them get their start doing stuff for friends.... or friends of friends. Understandable especially when students are writing for students. Minimal fees seem like a good idea for people to get an idea what their work is worth.

[nickysnd]

rainmain, that would be one of those situations on the rate list: $0.00 for amateur non-budget films. Let's leave that pleasure to amateurs. We are talking budget films where slaves (calling themselves composers) pop in and offer their services for peanuts, killing the market for the professionals who are trying to make a living out of this profession.

Man I hate that attitude: "I think that would be hard..." while failing to point out what would make it hard. Amateur non-budget films do not make it hard. That's outside the market anyway.

I think what makes it hard is -- the looser attitude: "I don't think it will work.." What is that would prevent it to work? Why not trying it to see whether it will work or not? Maybe it will. And then if it doesn't there can be other ways. What is the alternative -- doing nothing, accepting the unacceptable? Do *you* prefer to crawl in the mud because of slaves? Then *you* perhaps are, or deserve to be, one of them.

The problem is in the attitude, not outside, in others. Composers' problems are precisely that -- composers' problems. Musicians seem to be smarter than composers, also they seem to have more self-respect and practical sense.

[SBallard]

Harlan is dead on. Thanks for posting this. Even though he's speaking about writing, it applies to the composer just as much. This particular subject has been a thorn in my side for a long time.

I agree with a lot of what is said here but part of the problem is that everyone talks about it but no one does anything about it.

I think another effect of all of this is the fear of being undercut by other composers desperate to have music placed in films, etc. and in turn composers lowering their rates. I'm sure some of the film makers realize this and use it to their advantage. The second that this starts to undercut one of the big name composers pocketbooks, that's when they will start chiming in on this and I'm afraid it will be to late to recover from.

In one of the other videos he again nails it and told a lady that was a writer, the moment you write something copyright it. I don't care if it's a novel or some crappy little poem, copyright it!.

[rainmain]

rainmain, that would be one of those situations on the rate list: $0.00 for amateur non-budget films. Let's leave that pleasure to amateurs. We are talking budget films where slaves (calling themselves composers) pop in and offer their services for peanuts, killing the market for the professionals who are trying to make a living out of this profession.

Man I hate that attitude: "I think that would be hard..." while failing to point out what would make it hard. Amateur non-budget films do not make it hard. That's outside the market anyway.

WHAT THE HELL? Did you even try to understand what I wrote, or do you just assume that I'm disagreeing with you after reading 8 words of my post? The point I made is that young composers sometimes don't know what they're worth, for the reasons I stated (go back and read it). It seems to me that having base fees in place as a union would help these young composers realize their worth as they enter the professional world.

Is it that hard to connect the dots between the fact that many young composers get their start doing student/ameteur stuff for free, and that those young composers, eager to please, don't know what they're worth when they get out of school and want to make a name for themselves? All I'm doing is pointing out there is a reason that "slaves" and "amateurs" exist, that they are not purposely out to destroy us. Having a union in place seems like a great way to increase awareness to young composers. What in that line of thought contradicts anything you have said?

Man I hate that attitude: "I think that would be hard..." while failing to point out what would make it hard. Amateur non-budget films do not make it hard. That's outside the market anyway.

Man I hate your attitude. If you're going to use quotations, don't re-write what I said and take it out of context.

[nickysnd]

Right. I misunderstood, sorry. Now I see your point.

Yet I wonder: why isn't it equally hard for young players to have a sense of their worth when they start their career? Young musicians don't offer their services for peanuts or for free. They would play for money. Why young composers have this problem, while young players don't have it? Huh?

How about young copyists? They don't have this problem either. Or young orchestrators. Orchestrating is very close to composing. Why don't THEY orchestrate for peanuts?

Actually, I don't think this issue is related to age... What's the matter with composers?

[awpmusic]

Actually, I don't think this issue is related to age... What's the matter with composers?

Far too many of us around in comparison to the amount of work around. Supply and demand I suspect.

[nikolas]

One other issue about composing vs the rest.

In order to play any instrument relatively well, you do need to study, etc. You don't get THAT many self taught performers.
In order to orchestrate you do need to study.
In order to copy you need to study and know music rather well. (and let's face it, it's not exactly popular).

It appears that the general idea with composing (as well as art/PS/etc actually) is that... you don't really need to study. Anyone can do it. Go for it! And this reduces the value largely! It does appear that more creative fields are automatically assumed to rely on "talent", "personality", etc and not "schooling", "knowledge", "experience" (although for the last one I would imagine that there's also a problem with young composer. How can you trust someone with no experience to do a job well paid? Not that I agree, please understand, with that, but I'm providing another point of view!

[nickysnd]

Far too many of us around in comparison to the amount of work around. Supply and demand I suspect.
And that's yet another reason for join an union and set up minimal fees. Makes no sense to screw our own income because we are to many. Very good we are too many, that means power if we unite. We'll set up minimal fees, outlaw slavery, and then producers will have to pay. When they will have to pay, they will dismiss amateurs just like that -- "I pay good money, so I want some good stuff, not loops and garbageband.";) The slaves will be out of this business and go where they belong, doing non-budget amateur projects.

[Thomas Regin]

In order to play any instrument relatively well, you do need to study

Yes, but "studying" can mean sitting at home practicing. Not necessarily with a teacher!

In order to orchestrate you do need to study.

In my opinion that is not true! I have never had an orchestration-class in my life. Yet, I can still deliver an almost finished score for an orchestra to play. I did study music theory, but never orchestration! The music theory is helpful but definitely not a must for orchestrating! It's all about using your ears/imagination and jotting something down on a paper. Obviously an orchestrator who doesn't read notes, need a helping hand (like McCartney had with his oratorium).

Anyway.. Point is that it all boils down to your finished product. Every university diploma in the world can't get you a deal, if your client is looking for something else. The diplomas may help you get you through the door to his office, but unless you can deliver exactly what the client wants, you're out - and 2 million others are waiting just outside. And with a "buyers market" like that, prices drop. However, with so many talented composers out there, who will the client hire? The one he likes best, of course! And that's why there's still work for all of us who want it! And who's the client gonna use again for his next project? You, of course!

Professional composers can't and should never work for free. Companies that are unable to pay their employees won't ever become successful (except in fairytales), so don't prostitute yourself to get a bit of publicity!

Oh, and Harlan Ellison is right.

Thomas.

[nikolas]

By "study" I don't mean in a uni, Thomas. I mean the general idea of "practice" and practice a lot.

You can put a loop together and a bass line with little to no knowledge, without knowing how to read notes, and without much effort. You can't orchestrate however with simmilar ease. Nor play an instrument.

Other than that I also agree to what the video guys says and to what you say about diplomas, etc

[nickysnd]

nikolas has a good point -- it's also how we are perceived. Composers are perceived as straydogs bitting each other while licking producers' hands for a few dry bones. It's a matter of lack of self-respect -- how would they respect us when we don't respect ourselves? There's no one to blame for that but us. An union and minimal legal fees will solve also this ugly perception. As we are right now, we are some sort of pariah. And this is not likely to change without joint action. Divided we'll fall, that's well known.

Again -- AFM really works, when dealing with the same producers. So it's possible, it's do-able. It's just a matter of will.

[nikolas]

Quick question:

Unions are... local. (country wise). If I'm the uk prices in LA don't matter to me, do they? :S

but I agree with nickysnd, at some point composing needs to be perceived, at last, as a valid profession, a valid and serious commitement. At least in Greece, I've had teachers trying to persuade me away from music, to do "something serious". If the audience sees composing like this, and some of us do so as well, then... well... beep it! :(

[Dave Bourke]

With regard to players and composers, the vast majority of people believe that if you can play an instrument, you can compose. They fail to see any difference between these two skills.

In a similar way, writers have little or no value attached to their work because "everyone can write." OK, yes, writing is easy. But writing well is anything but.

I've been both a professional writer and composer all my life and I've run up against this attitude endlessly. Harlan is right. The problem is people's stupidity, greed, incompetence, and inability to distinguish shit from shinola.

Kind regards.

[PaulR]

With regard to players and composers, the vast majority of people believe that if you can play an instrument, you can compose. They fail to see any difference between these two skills.

In a similar way, writers have little or no value attached to their work because "everyone can write." OK, yes, writing is easy. But writing well is anything but.

I've been both a professional writer and composer all my life and I've run up against this attitude endlessly. Harlan is right. The problem is people's stupidity, greed, incompetence, and inability to distinguish shit from shinola.

Kind regards.


Yes - good post indeed Dave.

All of that is truth.

This is what really REALLY gets me. Your last paragraph. I sometimes feel like saying to people who have rank sh!te taste in let's say past filmscoring as this seems to be topical.......

How the hell do you know if what you're writing is any good?

It's a tough one, because I'm not really a writer myself - more of an orchestrator. And Thomas is partly right about orchestration - you can do it without any formal training. Where you could miss out though - is in a lot of colouration. Orchestration can be more than just picking which instruments play what. But he's more or less right.

[Dave Bourke]

In a similar way, writers have little or no value attached to their work because "everyone can write." OK, yes, writing is easy. But writing well is anything but.

But...but.

I've actually managed to demonstrate my own point about writing well. The second sentence should have been:

In a similar way, writers have little or no value attached to their work because "everyone can write." OK, yes, writing is easy. However, writing well is anything but.

Edit: PaulR – I should have made it clearer in my initial post that by composing I mean writing music, and by writing I mean writing language. Sorry for any confusion. But your question is excellent: "How the hell do you know if what you're writing is any good?"

For me, if it doesn't make the hair on the back of my neck stand up, it's pap.

Kind regards.

[nickysnd]

How the hell do you know if what you're writing is any good?
That's a tricky one...;)

If it does its job -- i.e. your employer likes it -- then it's good.

But I still don't understand this attitude: why is the filmmaker willing to pay someone for playing the music, and less willing to pay someone for creating the music? Isn't that somehow related to musicians union?

[PaulR]

That's a tricky one...;)

If it does its job -- i.e. your employer likes it -- then it's good.

That's it Nicky - if the man pays for it with folding money - then I'm prepared to concede ....it's brilliant! :D

playing[/U] the music, and less willing to pay someone for creating the music? Isn't that somehow related to musicians union?

The intangible versus something you can see with your own eyes? I really don't have a clue about that one.

I would like to be able to say that the best writers, orchestrators and players will always get to the top in their field. Isn't this true?

Geez - I must go and do some work now, this is getting crazy.

:D

[nickysnd]

The intangible versus something you can see with your own eyes? I really don't have a clue about that one.
The intangible, hmmm, good one. I'll try to remember it. Then I'll serve it to my next filmmaker: "Man I'll give you something reeeaally intangible, now show me the money."

I would like to be able to say that the best writers, orchestrators and players will always get to the top in their field. Isn't this true?
Those at the top are the best, otherwise they'd be somewhere else, methinks...

Geez - I must go and do some work now, this is getting crazy.
Now I have no idea why that made laugh literally loud! :D

[Counterpoint]

I said: minimal rates. Like a minimal fee of (say) $100 per second of music for big budget films. Less for medium budget. And so on, down to (say) $20 per second of music for indie movies. It can go anywhere above that figure, like $500 per second for John Williams.

My apologies... I misunderstood and confused the issue a bit.

I agree that a minimal rate per second of music would be beneficial, especially to novice composers who don't know how to set their own value. (as rainmain said)

I also agree with remmet that it would be a complicated chart to put together with many variables. Not impossible, but it would have to be very well thought out.

- Matt

[MellotronGhost]

this is an issue that touches about all areas of creative professionals nowadays.

mostly, in my opinion, it boils down to self esteem and a keen sense of what the client wants vs. what is possible to make given the individual circumstances.

i see this "dilemma" also in the graphic design market as well in the illustration market in which i am involved to a large degree since many years.
there, another drastic example is the design or/and illustration for cd covers and packaging. most labels or even musicians expect this to be done for nothing and - here again often cannot distinguish between a well done job and a lousy one. and thousands of young designers and artists are entering this field. globalization puts the icing on the cake by enabling designers in russia or brasil to work for literally peanuts because they simply do not need es much money to live on than someone in the u.s. or europe.

you just have to give yourself the freedom (sometimes that may feel like a luxury) to let those people and clients go who are not willing or capable to acknowledge the worth of your work. you have to set boundaries in which you can feel comfortable based on what you think your work is worth. trust your gut. if it FEELS not right, then you most likely won't get happy doing the job. financially or emotionally. at least this is my experience. you want to create win-win situations, a good job for fair money - otherwise you give in to something lop-sided and that will not be healthy in the long run.

it takes stamina and faith and the believe that you are going to be in the right place where you need to be. this is all. if you worry too much about the "competition" and the people who do not value your services, you only drive yourself crazy.

the internet is revolutionizing all this and changes will come and keep happening in a fast pace. the only way there is to stay flexible and not try to fight what we cannot change, but seek to change what we indeed can change within our current radius of activity however small or large it may be.

[nickysnd]

it takes stamina and faith and the believe that you are going to be in the right place where you need to be. this is all. if you worry too much about the "competition" and the people who do not value your services, you only drive yourself crazy.

the internet is revolutionizing all this and changes will come and keep happening in a fast pace. the only way there is to stay flexible and not try to fight what we cannot change, but seek to change what we indeed can change within our current radius of activity however small or large it may be.
That is exactly the individualistic perspective that has created the actual situation. So you think there is no use in uniting composers in an organization that will set minimal decent standards and will fight slavery and exploitation by legal means. You are the adept of: Believe in yourself, trust your guts, hope for luck, have faith, etc. Yeah, let's continue staying in our own little bubble. It's each one for himself and the hell with the others. Law of the jungle, baby.

You say: "not fighting what we cannot change." Says who that an unacceptable situation cannot be changed? The belief that a wrong cannot be changed is precisely the reason that makes that wrong unchangeable. The problem is not the producer, the market, we're too many, competition, slaves, the others, etc. The problem is in each one's head.

As I said, musicians are smart, composers are stupid. They deserve both their miserable situation and the way they are perceived: as straydogs -- bitting each other's back and licking the hand that throws them a few little bones.

[MellotronGhost]

nickysnd: here i get the feeling you love to argue just for the sake of arguing. i have not said that your idea about a union would be bad. i have written about the status quo and how we can personally and individually not feel frightened - right now. of course in a grander scheme anything can be changed and we all can contribute, and as change always starts from within, it is far better done when we can act not from a place of fear but of positive expectation. right now there is no such union that i can think of. in fact i was not addressing this at all.

besides, a union like this would have to be powerful and influential. and that involves a certain size (including an apparatus of administration) and politics. with no judgment on that, such organizations like in other areas are having to face the difficulty that the market is changing so fast that it is in its structure they may struggle to be flexible enough to adapt to all the changes. media and technology developments are further and further ahead of any government that can pass adequate laws to regulate it. in that situation such organizations can mutate into monsters like a certain one that engages in desperate lawsuits against students and other harmless individuals. maybe personally i enjoy freedom more than regulations because i like to trust the universe more than man made limitations made out of fear, but of course it could work out to be a good thing too. whatever, it does not exist yet. and if e.g. the graphic design industry can't produce such a union, it must be a truly difficult thing to establish (how about starting by getting rid of the unethical "work-for-hire" contracts?). i would be surprised if anybody on this forum has enough influence to get something like this started. you are welcome to surprise me.

until then, please understand that i am not here to argue, i just add my own viewpoint, you are free to take it or leave it, i am not trying to render anybody's view invalid. i just add my view, as you added yours, no more.

[nikolas]

You know what I find dead faulty in a general mentality around us? The mentality of the "free" Internet! Allow me to explain, cause I think it makes sense with this discussion.

(Not willing to discuss piracy, or anything close to that, I take it as a fact). With the Internet one of the things that changed is that 'normal' people, without knowledge, but mainly without paying anything got their hands on professional software. Sure piracy did exist previously, but right now even my grandma (yeah... right) has Photoshop and Adobe Premiere.

Result? Free product - > I can toy with it for free - > I can have (awful) results (even if I don't understand it) -> Who needs pros?

i. All pros must have the cracked programs so they haven't spent in order to get their studio running (lack of capital then)
ii. All pros are ignorant as much as I am, since I've managed to get the same results in no time (lack of respect).
iii. My friend told me about www.postyourmusicandgetnothing.com and there are A LOT of people there giving their music for free, I'll do the same (lack of understanding and beeping the industry).

And this, above, is not only an issue for the composer, but for the "clients" as well. You do get the "nya... hwat do you need? I want you to write a moody tune..." and they know shit about what they're asking.

[nickysnd]

nickysnd: here i get the feeling you love to argue just for the sake of arguing. i have not said that your idea about a union would be bad. i have written about the status quo and how we can personally and individually not feel frightened - right now. of course in a grander scheme anything can be changed and we all can contribute, and as change always starts from within, it is far better done when we can act not from a place of fear but of positive expectation. right now there is no such union that i can think of. in fact i was not addressing this at all.

besides, a union like this would have to be powerful and influential. and that involves a certain size (including an apparatus of administration) and politics. with no judgment on that, such organizations like in other areas are having to face the difficulty that the market is changing so fast that it is in its structure they may struggle to be flexible enough to adapt to all the changes. media and technology developments are further and further ahead of any government that can pass adequate laws to regulate it. in that situation such organizations can mutate into monsters like a certain one that engages in desperate lawsuits against students and other harmless individuals. maybe personally i enjoy freedom more than regulations because i like to trust the universe more than man made limitations made out of fear, but of course it could work out to be a good thing too. whatever, it does not exist yet. and if e.g. the graphic design industry can't produce such a union, it must be a truly difficult thing to establish (how about starting by getting rid of the unethical "work-for-hire" contracts?). i would be surprised if anybody on this forum has enough influence to get something like this started. you are welcome to surprise me.

until then, please understand that i am not here to argue, i just add my own viewpoint, you are free to take it or leave it, i am not trying to render anybody's view invalid. i just add my view, as you added yours, no more.
(my highlights, I hope you don't mind, it's just to clarify what I am addressing here)

About arguing/arguments: Arguing and bringing up arguments are two different things. I am not arguing with, or against, no one. Just bringing up arguments to support my point of view.

On frightening/fear: You seem to assume, I'm not sure why, that my opinions expressed here are based on fear. That would be a wrong assumption, for I can see nothing frightening here. Fear is a very precise thing, there's no trace of it in my posts. Beats me completely where you get that from. Now, suggestion: don't assign negative emotions to a person just because you don't like his points. Just addressing the points will suffice.
If I was to name a feeling that would apply to my posts, maybe mild disgust would be something closer to how they might feel like.

That was just to clarify those two aspects.

Now, you, and others, seem to completely ignore the fact that musicians do have a union, which prevents exactly the issues that are killing our profession: slavery and exploitation. My main point was that if musicians can do it, so can we, the very same way they do it. This is just a discussion, of course, but everybody seems to bring up justifications for maintaining the status quo, while it's obvious that the actual status quo is unacceptable in more than one way. When something is wrong, trying to find reasons for it is worse than wrong.

[nikolas]

Nickysnd,

You are in Canada, other people in the States, I'm in London and soon in Athens. What good is a union for me? Further to this is that I might be working to the States, the composer doesn't need to be present at all times. I'm already working at a game in Japan (!) Which union do I go to? The union should take care of the prices as seen in Japan, or London? Athens is tons cheaper than... LA, for example. (while London should be around the same pretty much).

I'm in total agreement with you about almost everything and the formation of a union; just questioning what I should do (and everybody in my own position) with such a case being formed. That's all. (which means, don't take my post in any negative light, I'm just asking and wondering out loud. :))

[nickysnd]

nikolas, I have already responded to your post even before you wrote it -- in the last two lines of my previous post:
everybody seems to bring up justifications for maintaining the status quo, while it's obvious that the actual status quo is unacceptable in more than one way. When something is wrong, trying to find reasons for it is worse than wrong.

I'd only add this: Where there's no will, there's no way.

[nikolas]

No, you didn't actually respond to my post. Not at all I might say. You just threw some assumption.

If you read my post, you'll see that I don't mean it in any negative way and that I agree with you in almost anything. How else am I supposed to tell you that: "YES! Let's make a union, can we sort out the details now?" Just because I post a question it doesn't mean I'm trying to find reasons to maintain the status quo.

I mean, come on! I'm simply trying to have a decent discussion here with Q&As all around. Situation is bad, I gave a few (additional) reasons (my post and the earlier one) about why things are so bad, so this is a first step to fix things. Further to that I provided a few difficult steps that might come up in the process. This does not mean what you claim it. On the contrary this is my way of aiding the cause of stoping this ridiculous notion of "working for free is good. I'll credit ya".

Do you have any idea how many people I've managed to put off? I've even made thread about this abuot 6-7 months again, for a guy looking for free music for a movie, etc. I'm quite active to that, when it happens.

I don't think a forum is the right place to start a union, but I'm in the mood for fixing things and being active.

Any ideas on the questions I provided in my above post? Orchestras in LA work with some guidelines. London abides with these "rules", but not Russia. And certainly not Greece! Budgets are hugely different from country to country, so this either interests only the American citizens (Canada included if you want) and a few cosmopolitan cities, in which case in a little while I won't have much interest, apart from the philosophical part and the part that I want to do what I feel is right, or it should concern as many people/composers as possible, in which case this interests me on a more practical level.

I really don't know how else to explain my good natured questions, above. I really can't. Sorry for this.

[nickysnd]

Of course it's impossible to make an international composers' union, but that's not the issue here. This is just a discussion, it's all theoretical. For the sake of the discussion, we go over countries differences, we assume that we are all in the same country, and discuss. It's all about bringing up points of view on the topic, and not about actually setting up a union, this obviously is not the place. What bothers me though is the barely masked negative attitude, from composers, towards the very idea of a composers union. That's the root of the problem, and not the surface technicalities that everybody mentions. Most composers actually don't want to change things. They like it the way it is. They are individualists failing to see that an union would only boost their individual advantages.

[nikolas]

Ok, thanks for your reply.

I will stand by and mention that I've fought "battles" against this mentality that you mention.
There you go, just an example: http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/showthread.php?t=8612

Or this: http://www.youngcomposers.com/forum/never-ever-ever-do-following-8627.html#post115633 (just found it, thus the edit)

You are making a huge assumption here, that you are actually fighting the "good battle" for the rights of all composers, while other composers barely mask their indifference about such an idea as te composers union, that this is the root of the problem, etc.

I really don't want to debate over this, I'm tired of debating over nothing. I've mentioned in CLEAR LETTERS that I agree with you and all the people who posted here, also agree! (and are against working for free). This forum has helped many times various composers who thought it to be a good idea to enter a paid project for free and it's still doing that, and remmet is doing a fine job bring to our attention such issues, or links for bloody craiglist!

So in all reality, I think that the members here are very aware of the situation and are against working for free and know very well how this destroyes the industry, etc, etc.

If you are to take any kind of discussion, ideas thrown, and examples as "proof" of composers barely masked negative attitude, then never mind me posting. I just don't want to take part in such a discussion, if it is to be like this.

[remmet]

Remmet here (aka Richard) checking in at 2:45 am - I should be sleeping but it's the first time I've had a chance to work on some of my own music in several days. So I see this has stirred things up, as it usually does!

If forming a union would foster the changes - in attitude, respect, budgets, etc. - that we all want, I'd say let's go for it. Not sure HOW we'd go for it, but that's another topic. However, I wonder if anyone's thought about another obstacle, one that I encounter all the time. It might not effect those in the top ranks of the business, but for the rest of us it's often an issue. I'm talking about competing with music libraries. For ads, industrial films, and countless other projects, a producer can simply say, "Hey, I've got a million CDs I can pick from for relatively little money, so why should I pay a lot more for a composer, especially one with an attitude? I just need to fill some space with the right mood, and the audio engineer I'm working with can hand it to me on a silver platter."

Just a late night thought.

Richard

[nickysnd]

nikolas, forget: agreeing, disagreeing, I, me, you, etc. -- It's a discussion: topics, points, comments on points, observations, ideas, stuff like that.

[nikolas]

nikolas, forget: agreeing, disagreeing, I, me, you, etc. -- It's a discussion: topics, points, comments on points, observations, ideas, stuff like that.
I see.

you are right I took it kinda personal, which in this case wasn't the case, so I'm sorry. :)

I still thing that different people act towards the same cause in a different way, but anyways...

[nickysnd]

a producer can simply say, "Hey, I've got a million CDs I can pick music from for relatively little money. Why should I pay a lot more for a composer?"
Because you want your film to be unique. Because the score is intrinsic part of the film. Because completing-the-film is not done by inserting music, completing-the-film is done by scoring. Because only a composer can match with custom music the narratives/moods/actions in your film. Because you don't want people to laugh out loud when hearing, in your film, the music from a tampax tv add. These are a few reasons for paying a professional composer. Remember: What you get is what you pay.

"I just need to fill some space with the right music, and the audio engineer I'm working with can hand it to me on a silver platter."
"... with the right music" -- The right music is called score and requires a composer, as seen above. If you, mr. film producer, just want to fill some space with some music, then you're right, libraries are the best place for you.

[Nanto Warrior]

Alright! Alright! Enough talk! We need to band together as an unstoppable force and change things! I believe a reason this hasnt happend already is greed....which is the result of capitalism. Guys at the top are not going to be interested in having their million dollar paychecks cut for the majority, so those a little lower down the totem pole suffer.

Unions all the way. We need a good designer for a website for composers:

www.f*ckyoupayme.com

We need backing from organizations like the Musicians Union, AFM, the British Academy of Composers and Songwriters, ASCAP, ASPEN, BMI, PRS....problems will persist unless we band together. Its OUR mentality that has to change.

The notion of 'Percieved Value' is VERY important to your career. If someone asks you to work for free on a project that pays nothing and has no merit...and the director isnt connected or GOING somewhere BIG TIME with his career....your response should REALLY be f*ck you pay me.

"We need music that's a bit John Williams like but kind of Harry Gregson-Willliams like"
Answer:
F*ck you. Pay me.


"We need a 12 minute underscore thats emotional and brings the project to life"
Answer:
F*ck you. Pay me.

"We can fund expenses for an orchestral score to the project"
Answer:
F*ck you. Pay me.

"Our feature will be shown at Cannes and other festivals where it may be likely to get picked up"
Answer: Are you paying the cameraman and actors? Are you working for free?
Director: Er, well.....
Answer: F*ck you. Pay me.

Screw not making it international! This 'amateur problem' persists around the globe...bringing me to another problem-globalization. Everythings on the internet for a student to download in their dorm for free-yes this can be eradicated....by setting standard rates.

Russia Will Rise Again! I will lead you and be powerful like Stalin! :mad:


<I feel like executing some amateurs now. Cue the death star march theme...>

The Golden Nanto Warrior. :D

PS: Yeah you guys know Im quite the comedian.....but this is serious, and no it wont be called f*ckyoupayme.com. We should get an excellent designer to do a website, get corporate backing from music organizations worldwide, and STANDARDIZE rates, seriously. No more peanuts.

PPS: Most composers make a living from ROYALTIES. This in its very nature is contradictary to standardization which is a linear form of income....I guess herein lies the problem....

[PaulR]

I seem to remember a story - so it may be incorrect factually - about Ennio Moriconne and a time he had in Hollywood. If I remember incorrectly then I apologize - but didn't Ennio Moriconne leave Hollywood because he kept getting offered the same money as everyone else - and in the end refused because he said he was a lot better than that?

[Richiebee]

I don't understand what's stopping you convincing directors that they NEED YOUR music. "Freeware" exists in many markets. It is perhaps more prevalent in the arts because so many people do this as a hobby, but man, you're not special by thinking it only applies to composers or even musicians.

Selling yourself is part of the business. Deal with it. Why shouldn't amateurs sell their soul for the price of experience? For most its the ONLY way to get a foot in the door. The market is incredibly saturated with talented (and not so talented) people. If you're good enough to be paid $100 for 1 second of music, convincing a director that you're worth it should be a breeze.

A union might help people in financially rich centres. For everyone else, it'll just kill the music.

I used to be a member of the AFM, but it really did nothing for me. Here they have no power because no one can afford union scale. The only union gigs are those from the CBC. It might as well be called the CBC union. The choice for producers here is simple... offer people work for less than scale, or don't do the production. Most people here would rather work for less than scale than never perform.

[nickysnd]

I don't understand what's stopping you convincing directors that they NEED YOUR music. "Freeware" exists in many markets. It is perhaps more prevalent in the arts because so many people do this as a hobby, but man, you're not special by thinking it only applies to composers or even musicians.

Selling yourself is part of the business. Deal with it. Why shouldn't amateurs sell their soul for the price of experience? For most its the ONLY way to get a foot in the door. The market is incredibly saturated with talented (and not so talented) people. If you're good enough to be paid $100 for 1 second of music, convincing a director that you're worth it should be a breeze.

A union might help people in financially rich centres. For everyone else, it'll just kill the music.

I used to be a member of the AFM, but it really did nothing for me. Here they have no power because no one can afford union scale. The only union gigs are those from the CBC. It might as well be called the CBC union. The choice for producers here is simple... offer people work for less than scale, or don't do the production. Most people here would rather work for less than scale than never perform.
I see.

Well put.

Life is just.