# What would you do?



## damoy (Jul 19, 2008)

Here's another hypothetical situation. Say you signed on to score a 40 minute documentary for x amount of dollars per minute. Now they've increased the length of the documentary to an hour and didn't offer any additional compensation. When you ask why (because the terms of the contract was for 40 minutes of music), they say that really like the cues that you've done up until this point and that the same cues (with none or very minor changes) can be used again and would work really well for the additional 20 minutes of footage. So because you don't need to create any new cues from scratch and can just lightly modify the existing ones, there really isn't much additional effort needed on your part. 

What would you do in this situation?

A. Demand more money because this is beyond the scope of the contract
B. Go on a tyrade about artists being taken avantage of
C. Smile, complete the project and get paid, charge them double the next time
D. Do nothing because this seems fair and it is a good gig
E. Other?


----------



## nikolas (Jul 19, 2008)

This is hypothetical right? We won't get the director in here in a week and trying to identidy him from his fingernails or anything! :D:D

Okie...

I don't think I'd demand something more really... I mean it's NOT additional work really, so it does seem [n]kinda[/b] fair.

What I WOULD do, and put my best efforts, would be to try and persuade them that the existing cues do NOT work that well (after all they hired you to do the best damn job, which is to compose on the pic), and that it would benefit the documentary if you would compose MORE music for them. Automatically this means more money for you, but more work as well. 

In terms of negotiation I would offer a couple of "traps" like... offer to do a couple (or 1) minute(s) of the next cues (the extra stuff) to show them what you mean for free. To give them an idea. After all you are being paid per minute and already got 40. Getting 1 more won't make THAT much difference really. Show them you're not after their money, but the good of the documentary.

Then, if they would seem reluctant, I would also decrease my fees. I would think that having already 40 minutes of music paid, I would live with... 10 even if I composed 15 or 20. After all, it's important to persuade them that you're not doing this for the money, but for the documentary and the best result. To prove to them that it is ALSO your name on the line.

etc, etc...

PS. Rereading your post: Editing existing audio files (or midi files), DOES take some effort, even if it's all the same. So it's not exactly free. Working for free in your scenario is not ideal, nor bad, since you already got 40 minutes of fees. So... :-/ But make sure they know you're doing them a favor!


----------



## Daryl (Jul 19, 2008)

Some of the suggested options are not available when you use live players. But in any case, I would just charge them pro rata for the extra minutes.

D


----------



## nikolas (Jul 19, 2008)

Heh... here is where my non experience with real life contracts + live players comes into play.

Good point Daryl!


----------



## damoy (Jul 19, 2008)

nikolas @ Fri Jul 18 said:


> This is hypothetical right? We won't get the director in here in a week and trying to identidy him from his fingernails or anything! :D:D



Yes absolutely, so feel free to speak freely. :mrgreen:


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 19, 2008)

I would start by offering that they re-use some of the cues. It's a documentary, not an action film or animation where the music has to be synced to the frame to work. Also, you say it's a 40-minute or 60-minute doc, but how much music is there? Is it constantly present, even under the talking parts? Given the royalty aspect, I sure like when a production uses as much of my music as they like. o-[][]-o


----------



## JohnG (Jul 19, 2008)

I agree with Ned. Documentaries frequently repeat cues. Besides, the people making them rarely make big money. 

One thing this might allow is to re-open the possibility that you own the music when the project is done. As you are no doubt aware, if you retain ownership of the music so you get the publishing royalties when the film is broadcast, plus, you can re-use it some other time.


----------



## DCWAVE (Jul 19, 2008)

Since you have an agreement for a specific amount of music to be composed at X rate, I would say that any sound editing of existing and accepted cues you do after the fact because they extended the video would justify an addendum with a sound editing fee - maybe at an hourly rate.


----------



## damoy (Jul 20, 2008)

Hmm, some interesting takes on the situation that I haven't really thought of. Good stuff! I'm starting to think that a combination of all the ideas (as-is re-use, vying for ownsherip, a nominal fee for editing, and charging for additional recording sessions if required) would provide a nice comprehensive response to the situation.


----------



## cc64 (Jul 20, 2008)

Hi Damoy,

if you have the time you should try and get the money that it would cost them to get a good music editor to do the rest of the job.

If you're too busy just tell them that you're real glad they're doing a 60 min version and that they are free to hire a music editor and use as much of your music as they wish. This way, they might realise that it does take time and money to edit your existing music into the extra 20 minutes of film and so they might think that you would be the best-suited guy for the job and suddenly be more inclined to pay for your time...

Make sure the extra minutes of music appear in the film's cue sheet. 

Good Luck!

CC64


----------



## Stephen Baysted (Jul 21, 2008)

Hi Damoy, 

How secure is this gig? And how tight is their deadline? And what's the likelihood you'll be working with the same company again?

Answering those questions should help you determine how tough you can be with them, although I agree it's always a very tricky balance to strike. 

Best of luck, hypothetically of course... :mrgreen: 


Cheers


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 21, 2008)

cc64 @ Sun Jul 20 said:


> Hi Damoy,
> 
> if you have the time you should try and get the money that it would cost them to get a good music editor to do the rest of the job.
> 
> ...



Usually nowadays, the composer ends up also being the music editor.

Present them with 2 options: a greater addiitonal amount of money for composing and recording the extra minutes and a smaller amount of money for digitally editing existing material to fit the scenes.


----------



## damoy (Jul 21, 2008)

Rousseau @ Mon Jul 21 said:


> Hi Damoy,
> 
> How secure is this gig? And how tight is their deadline? And what's the likelihood you'll be working with the same company again?
> 
> ...



Not sure how to rate the security of a gig. What if I said that it is more on the secure side, lots of time on the deadline, and chances of working with the same company again are very high?

And again some good points. I had not thought about offering a different rate for "editing".


----------



## Dave Connor (Jul 21, 2008)

You will get more money from the royalties if your minute total goes up via re-use (if royalties are applicable of course.) 

Everyone has to make the call regarding possibly irritating your (now and future) employer and harming your own financial interests by eating some additional work. I would very casually say " so, can I get a few more bucks for this extra work?" Then give them a fee calculated on work hours or whatever the original fee was based on. This additional fee should be discounted in a way that you can clearly show them which will make it more appealing and friendly. If you ask in that matter-of-fact way they will be more comfortable than if you make a big fuss. 

If you don't get the extra money and it seems unfair than you have to up your deal on the next one figuring it could well happen again. Most people give estimates that cover potential additional work to avoid this kind of thing because it happens all the time and causes heartache and headaches.


----------



## Stephen Baysted (Jul 21, 2008)

damoy @ Mon Jul 21 said:


> Rousseau @ Mon Jul 21 said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Damoy,
> ...



Hmmm. In my experience, the first two can be inextricably intertwined; the longer the deadline, the more chance you can be replaced - the shorter the deadline, the more leverage you can exert.

The return work is tricky, but on the other hand, you don't want to get yourself into a situation where they think they can mess you around with impunity. 

Not an easy one. 

Good luck


----------

